Covered vs. uncovered self-expandable metal stents for malignant distal biliary strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Tringali Alberto1,Hassan Cesare2,Rota Matteo3,Rossi Marta4,Mutignani Massimiliano1,Aabakken Lars5

Affiliation:

1. Endoscopy Unit, Niguarda Hospital, Milan, Italy

2. Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy

3. Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

4. Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health,University of Milan, Milan, Italy

5. Endoscopy, Oslo University Hospital – Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway

Abstract

Abstract Background Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are used for palliation of distal malignant biliary strictures, but the role of covered SEMS is less clear. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis to compare the performance of covered and uncovered SEMS in patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary strictures. Methods A computerized medical search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library between 2000 and December 2016 to identify all randomized trials that compared covered with uncovered SEMS in patients with distal malignant biliary strictures. Primary outcomes were stent failure and patient mortality; secondary outcomes were stent dysfunction and adverse events. Pooled estimates were computed using the random effects model. Results Overall, 11 RCTs involving 1272 patients were included. The primary outcomes of stent failure and patient mortality did not differ significantly between covered and uncovered SEMS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.40 – 1.17; HR 0.89, 95 %CI 0.76 – 1.05, respectively). However, stent migration and sludge formation were much more common with covered SEMS (odds ratio [OR] 5.11, 95 %CI 1.84 – 14.17; OR 2.46, 95 %CI 1.37 – 4.43). The use of covered SEMS was associated with a lower rate of tumor ingrowth (OR 0.21, 95 %CI 0.09 – 0.50) but a higher rate of tumor overgrowth (OR 2.00, 95 %CI 1.15 – 3.48) compared with uncovered stents. The rates of procedure-related adverse events were similar in both groups. Conclusion There was a risk reduction of about 32 % for both stent failure and patient mortality with covered SEMS but this difference was not significant. Migration and sludge rates were higher with covered SEMS, whereas tumor ingrowth was more likely with uncovered SEMS. The data show no added benefit of covered SEMS; further stent evolution is desirable.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3