Stent performance in palliative transhepatic treatment of malignant biliary obstruction: a randomized study comparing covered versus uncovered stents

Author:

Elkilany Aboelyazid12ORCID,Alwarraky Mohamed1,Geisel Dominik2,Maaly Mohamed A3,Denecke Timm4

Affiliation:

1. Department of Diagnostic Medical Imaging and Interventional Radiology, National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt

2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany

3. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt

4. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Leipzig University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany

Abstract

Background Considering the limitations in both uncovered self-expandable metallic stents (USEMS) and covered self-expandable metallic stents (CSEMS), it is difficult to make a general recommendation for their application in percutaneous decompression of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Purpose To compare percutaneous transhepatic CSEMSs versus USEMSs for the palliative treatment of MBO in terms of technical success, clinical success, stent patency, patient survival, complications, and stent dysfunction. Material and Methods This prospective randomized study included 66 patients with unresectable MBO. CSEMSs were inserted in 31 patients (26 men, 5 women; mean age = 63.8 ± 7.96 years) and USEMSs were inserted in 35 patients (26 men, 9 women; mean age = 62.3 ± 11.7 years). Results Mean primary stent patency duration was 138 ± 92.7 days in CSEMSs versus 150 ± 77.9 days in USEMSs ( P = 0.578). Tumor overgrowth occurred exclusively in one patient with CSEMS ( P = 0.470) and tumor ingrowth exclusively in two patients with USEMS ( P = 0.494). Stent migration occurred in two patients with CSEMSs versus one patient with USEMSs ( P = 0.579). Hemobilia occurred in five patients with CSEMSs versus three patients with USEMSs while bile leakage occurred in one patient in each group despite the larger introducer sheath caliber with CSEMSs (9 F vs. 6–7 F). There was no significant difference regarding patient survival ( P = 0.969). Conclusion In our cohort of patients with rather poor life expectancy, there was no significant difference between covered and uncovered stents for the palliative treatment of MBO. However, considering the higher cost of CSEMs and the larger introducer diameter necessary for their placement, USEMSs can be preferred.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine,Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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