Evaluating optimal bilateral biliary stenting in endoscopic reintervention after initial plastic stent dysfunction for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction: Retrospective cross-sectional study.

Mitsuru Okuno, Keisuke Iwata, Takuji Iwashita, Tsuyoshi Mukai, Kota Shimojo, Yosuke Ohashi, Yuhei Iwasa, Akihiko Senju, Shota Iwata, Ryuichi Tezuka, Hironao Ichikawa, Naoki Mita, Shinya Uemura, Kensaku Yoshida, Akinori Maruta, Eiichi Tomita, Ichiro Yasuda, Masahito Shimizu
{"title":"Evaluating optimal bilateral biliary stenting in endoscopic reintervention after initial plastic stent dysfunction for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction: Retrospective cross-sectional study.","authors":"Mitsuru Okuno, Keisuke Iwata, Takuji Iwashita, Tsuyoshi Mukai, Kota Shimojo, Yosuke Ohashi, Yuhei Iwasa, Akihiko Senju, Shota Iwata, Ryuichi Tezuka, Hironao Ichikawa, Naoki Mita, Shinya Uemura, Kensaku Yoshida, Akinori Maruta, Eiichi Tomita, Ichiro Yasuda, Masahito Shimizu","doi":"10.1111/den.14776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The placement of plastic stents (PS), including intraductal PS (IS), is useful in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (UMHBO) because of patency and ease of endoscopic reintervention (ERI). However, the optimal stent replacement method for PS remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 322 patients with UMHBO. Among them, 146 received PS placement as initial drainage (across-the-papilla PS [aPS], 54; IS, 92), whereas 75 required ERI. Eight bilateral aPS, 21 bilateral IS, and 17 bilateral self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placements met the inclusion criteria. Rates of technical and clinical success, adverse events, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), overall survival, and secondary ERI were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant intergroup differences in rates of technical or clinical success, adverse events, RBO occurrence, or overall survival. The median TRBO was significantly shorter in the aPS group (47 days) than IS (91 days; P = 0.0196) and SEMS (143 days; P < 0.01) groups. Median TRBO did not differ significantly between the IS and SEMS groups (P = 0.44). On Cox multivariate analysis, the aPS group had the shortest stent patency (hazard ratio 2.67 [95% confidence interval 1.05-6.76], P = 0.038). For secondary ERI, the median endoscopic procedure time was significantly shorter in the IS (22 min) vs. SEMS (40 min) group (P = 0.034).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bilateral IS and SEMS placement featured prolonged patency after first ERI. Because bilateral IS placement is faster than SEMS placement and IS can be removed during secondary ERI, it may be a good option for first ERI.</p>","PeriodicalId":72813,"journal":{"name":"Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/den.14776","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The placement of plastic stents (PS), including intraductal PS (IS), is useful in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (UMHBO) because of patency and ease of endoscopic reintervention (ERI). However, the optimal stent replacement method for PS remains unclear.

Methods: This retrospective study included 322 patients with UMHBO. Among them, 146 received PS placement as initial drainage (across-the-papilla PS [aPS], 54; IS, 92), whereas 75 required ERI. Eight bilateral aPS, 21 bilateral IS, and 17 bilateral self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placements met the inclusion criteria. Rates of technical and clinical success, adverse events, recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), overall survival, and secondary ERI were compared.

Results: There were no significant intergroup differences in rates of technical or clinical success, adverse events, RBO occurrence, or overall survival. The median TRBO was significantly shorter in the aPS group (47 days) than IS (91 days; P = 0.0196) and SEMS (143 days; P < 0.01) groups. Median TRBO did not differ significantly between the IS and SEMS groups (P = 0.44). On Cox multivariate analysis, the aPS group had the shortest stent patency (hazard ratio 2.67 [95% confidence interval 1.05-6.76], P = 0.038). For secondary ERI, the median endoscopic procedure time was significantly shorter in the IS (22 min) vs. SEMS (40 min) group (P = 0.034).

Conclusions: Bilateral IS and SEMS placement featured prolonged patency after first ERI. Because bilateral IS placement is faster than SEMS placement and IS can be removed during secondary ERI, it may be a good option for first ERI.

评估对无法切除的恶性肝胆道梗阻进行首次塑料支架功能障碍后的内镜再介入治疗中的最佳双侧胆道支架:回顾性横断面研究。
目的:放置塑料支架(PS),包括导管内支架(IS),对无法切除的恶性肝胆道梗阻(UMHBO)患者很有用,因为它通畅且易于内镜再介入(ERI)。然而,PS 的最佳支架置换方法仍不明确:这项回顾性研究纳入了 322 名 UMHBO 患者。其中,146 人接受了 PS 置入作为初始引流(跨蝶鞍 PS [aPS],54 人;IS,92 人),75 人需要 ERI。符合纳入标准的双侧 aPS 8 例、双侧 IS 21 例、双侧自膨胀金属支架 (SEMS) 17 例。比较了技术和临床成功率、不良事件、复发性胆道梗阻(RBO)、RBO发生时间(TRBO)、总生存率和二次ERI:结果:在技术和临床成功率、不良事件、RBO发生率和总生存率方面,组间无明显差异。aPS组的中位TRBO(47天)明显短于IS组(91天;P=0.0196)和SEMS组(143天;P 结论:aPS组的中位TRBO明显短于IS组和SEMS组:双侧 IS 和 SEMS 置入可延长首次 ERI 后的通畅时间。由于双侧 IS 置入比 SEMS 置入更快,而且 IS 可以在二次 ERI 期间移除,因此它可能是首次 ERI 的一个不错选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信