Comparative Effectiveness of ERCP and EUS-Guided Techniques for "Primary Biliary Drainage" in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Zaheer Nabi, Jayanta Samanta, Jahnvi Dhar, Mona Aggarwal, Jahangeer Basha, Amrit Gahra, Aman Golchha, Stefano Francesco Crinò, Antonio Facciorusso, Sundeep Lakhtakia, D Nageshwar Reddy
{"title":"Comparative Effectiveness of ERCP and EUS-Guided Techniques for \"Primary Biliary Drainage\" in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Zaheer Nabi, Jayanta Samanta, Jahnvi Dhar, Mona Aggarwal, Jahangeer Basha, Amrit Gahra, Aman Golchha, Stefano Francesco Crinò, Antonio Facciorusso, Sundeep Lakhtakia, D Nageshwar Reddy","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a viable alternative in cases with failed ERCP transpapillary drainage (ERCP-TPD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD for primary biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD in DMBO, from inception until September 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical success and secondary endpoints included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies (815 patients, 56.1% male) were included in this analysis. Indications for biliary drainage were pancreatic carcinoma (75.1%), followed by cholangiocarcinoma (10.1%). Clinical success was comparable between EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.40; P=0.32). Technical success was similar between the 2 groups (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 0.83-5.25; P=0.12). There was a trend toward fewer adverse events in the EUS-BD group (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40-1.07; P=0.09), with significantly lower odds of post-procedure pancreatitis (OR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; P=0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EUS-BD is comparable to ERCP for primary biliary drainage in DMBO patients with shorter procedural time and a significantly reduced risk of post-procedure pancreatitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002075","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a viable alternative in cases with failed ERCP transpapillary drainage (ERCP-TPD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD for primary biliary drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO).

Methods: We searched Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies comparing EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD in DMBO, from inception until September 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical success and secondary endpoints included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events.

Results: Eight studies (815 patients, 56.1% male) were included in this analysis. Indications for biliary drainage were pancreatic carcinoma (75.1%), followed by cholangiocarcinoma (10.1%). Clinical success was comparable between EUS-BD and ERCP-TPD groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.40; P=0.32). Technical success was similar between the 2 groups (OR 2.09; 95% CI, 0.83-5.25; P=0.12). There was a trend toward fewer adverse events in the EUS-BD group (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40-1.07; P=0.09), with significantly lower odds of post-procedure pancreatitis (OR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; P=0.001).

Conclusion: EUS-BD is comparable to ERCP for primary biliary drainage in DMBO patients with shorter procedural time and a significantly reduced risk of post-procedure pancreatitis.

ERCP和EUS引导的 "原发性胆道引流 "技术在恶性远端胆道梗阻中的效果比较:系统综述与元分析》。
背景和目的:内镜超声引导胆道引流术(EUS-BD)是ERCP经胆囊引流术(ERCP-TPD)失败病例的可行替代方案。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较 EUS-BD 和 ERCP-TPD 对远端恶性胆道梗阻(DMBO)患者进行原发性胆道引流的有效性和安全性:我们检索了 Embase、PubMed 和 Medline 数据库中从开始到 2023 年 9 月比较 EUS-BD 和 ERCP-TPD 治疗 DMBO 的研究。主要终点是临床成功率,次要终点包括技术成功率、手术持续时间和不良事件:本次分析共纳入八项研究(815 名患者,56.1% 为男性)。胆道引流的适应症是胰腺癌(75.1%),其次是胆管癌(10.1%)。EUS-BD 组和 ERCP-TPD 组的临床成功率相当(OR 1.34;95% CI,0.75-2.40;P=0.32)。两组的技术成功率相似(OR 2.09;95% CI,0.83-5.25;P=0.12)。EUS-BD组的不良事件呈减少趋势(OR 0.65;95% CI,0.40-1.07;P=0.09),术后胰腺炎的几率显著降低(OR 0.17;95% CI,0.06-0.50;P=0.001):结论:EUS-BD 在 DMBO 患者的原发性胆道引流方面与 ERCP 具有可比性,且手术时间更短,术后胰腺炎的风险明显降低。
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
Journal of clinical gastroenterology
Journal of clinical gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
339
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.
×
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