Dataset Information

Choledochal stenting for treatment of extrahepatic biliary obstruction in cats.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited information currently exists regarding the clinical progression and outcomes of cats that undergo choledochal stenting as a treatment for extrahepatic biliary obstruction (EHBO).

Hypothesis/objectives

Describe clinical characteristics, indications for choledochal stent placement, procedure, and outcomes in a cohort of cats undergoing choledochal stenting and evaluate risk factors associated with survival as well as recurrence of EHBO in affected cats.

Animals

Twenty-three client-owned cats undergoing choledochal stent placement.

Methods

Retrospective study. Medical records from 6 academic institutions were reviewed, and data were extracted and analyzed statistically.

Results

Median age of cats was 10.1 years (range, 2-16), and all cats had at least 2 clinical signs. Most common clinical signs were vomiting in 20/22 (90.9%), inappetence in 19/22 (86.4%), and lethargy in 19/23 (82.6%). Procedural complications were uncommon and rarely related to the stenting procedure. Clinical signs improved postoperatively in 15/20 (75.0%) cats and serum total bilirubin concentration decreased postoperatively in 13/19 (68.4%) cats. Eighteen (78.3%) cats survived to discharge. Recurrence of EHBO was documented in 7/18 (38.9%) cats that survived to discharge. Cholelithiasis was associated with recurrence of EHBO. Median survival time for cats that survived to discharge was 931 days (range, 19-3034). Absence of peritoneal effusion was associated with survival to discharge.

Conclusions and clinical importance

Choledochal stenting was an effective treatment modality in cats with EHBO with few procedural complications and potential for prolonged survival, but substantial risk for recurrence of EHBO was identified.

SUBMITTER: Griffin MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8692206 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been widely used to treat patients with malignant biliary obstruction. However, it is still unclear which method of PBD (endoscopic nasobiliary drainage or endoscopic biliary stenting) is more effective. Thus, we carried out a meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) and endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) in malignant biliary obstruction in terms of preoperative and postoperative complications.MethodsWe conducted a literature search of EMBASE databases, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant available articles that were published in English, and we then compared ENBD and EBS in malignant biliary obstruction patients. The preoperative cholangitis rate, the preoperative pancreatitis rate, the incidence of stent dysfunction, the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, and morbidity were analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express the pooled effect on dichotomous variables, and the pooled analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.ResultsSeven published studies (n = 925 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. We determined that patients with malignant biliary obstruction who received ENBD had reductions in the preoperative cholangitis rate (OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.25-0.51, P < 0.0001), the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.18-0.82, P = 0.01), the incidence of stent dysfunction (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.28-0.56, P < 0.0001), and morbidity (OR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.27-0.82, P = 0.008) compared with patients who received EBS.ConclusionsThe current meta-analysis suggests that ENBD is better than EBS for malignant biliary obstruction in terms of the preoperative cholangitis rate, the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, the incidence of stent dysfunction, and morbidity. However, a limitation is that there are no data from randomized controlled trials.

Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic drainage is the primary treatment for unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). This study developed and validated a pre-endoscopic predictive score for clinical success after stent placement.MethodsPatients with unresectable MBO undergoing ERCP-guided endobiliary stent placement between 2007 and 2017 were randomly divided into derivation (n = 383) and validation (n = 128) cohorts. To develop the risk score, clinical parameters were built by logistic regression to predict (1) ≥ 50% total bilirubin (TB) resolution within 2 weeks and (2) bilirubin normalization (TB level <1.2 mg/dL) within 6 weeks following stenting. The scoring scheme was applied to the validation cohort to test its performance.ResultsA ≥ 50% TB resolution within 2 weeks was shown in 70.5% of cases. The risk scoring scheme had areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64-0.76) and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.57-0.77) in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. Thirty-one percent had TB normalization within 6 weeks after stenting. Significant predictors for TB normalization were extrahepatic biliary obstruction (odds ratio [OR] = 2.35), pre-endoscopic TB level (OR = 0.88), and stent type (OR = 0.42). The AUROC of a risk score for predicting TB normalization within 6 weeks was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.72-0.83) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.67-0.86) in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. A score > 1.30 yielded a specificity of 98% and a positive predictive value of 84% for predicting TB normalization. A score of < -4.18 provided a sensitivity of 80%-90% and a negative predictive value of 90%-93% for predicting the absence of TB normalization.ConclusionsThe pre-endoscopic scoring system comprising biliary obstruction level, liver biochemistry, and type of stent provides prediction indices for TB normalization within 6 weeks after stenting. This scheme may help endoscopists identify patients with unresectable MBO suited for palliative stenting.