Biliary stenting with and without endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with malignant biliary obstruction: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Aamir Saeed, Saira Yousuf, Muhammad Ali Khan, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Muhammad Aziz, Ray Arnab, Janak Shah, Anand Kumar, Alexander Schlachterman, Thomas Kowalski, Faisal Kamal
{"title":"Biliary stenting with and without endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with malignant biliary obstruction: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Aamir Saeed, Saira Yousuf, Muhammad Ali Khan, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Muhammad Aziz, Ray Arnab, Janak Shah, Anand Kumar, Alexander Schlachterman, Thomas Kowalski, Faisal Kamal","doi":"10.1097/MEG.0000000000002913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) is commonly performed during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) before stent placement. Studies comparing adverse events between patients with MBO undergoing ERCP with and without EBS have reported conflicting results. We conducted an updated meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only to evaluate the safety of EBS in these patients and its efficacy in decreasing the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We reviewed several databases from inception to 10 January 2024 to identify RCTs that compared adverse events of biliary stenting with and without EBS in the patients with MBO. Our outcomes of interest were PEP, successful stent insertion, and adverse events such as cholangitis, bleeding, perforation, stent migration, and stent occlusion. We calculated pooled risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all of the outcomes and used a random effect model to analyze the data. We included six RCTs with 1070 patients. There was no significant difference in rate of PEP between groups [risk ratio (95% CI): 0.50 (0.23-1.08)]. We found no significant difference in the rate of successful stent insertion between groups [risk ratio (95% CI): 1.01 (0.99-1.02)]. The rate of post-ERCP bleeding was significantly higher in EBS group [risk ratio (95% CI): 7.43 (2.45-22.53)]. We found no significant difference in rates of cholangitis, perforation, stent migration, and stent occlusion between groups. EBS does not decrease the risk of PEP in patients with MBO and is associated with increased risk of bleeding.</p>","PeriodicalId":11999,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology","volume":"37 3","pages":"257-262"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000002913","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) is commonly performed during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) before stent placement. Studies comparing adverse events between patients with MBO undergoing ERCP with and without EBS have reported conflicting results. We conducted an updated meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only to evaluate the safety of EBS in these patients and its efficacy in decreasing the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We reviewed several databases from inception to 10 January 2024 to identify RCTs that compared adverse events of biliary stenting with and without EBS in the patients with MBO. Our outcomes of interest were PEP, successful stent insertion, and adverse events such as cholangitis, bleeding, perforation, stent migration, and stent occlusion. We calculated pooled risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all of the outcomes and used a random effect model to analyze the data. We included six RCTs with 1070 patients. There was no significant difference in rate of PEP between groups [risk ratio (95% CI): 0.50 (0.23-1.08)]. We found no significant difference in the rate of successful stent insertion between groups [risk ratio (95% CI): 1.01 (0.99-1.02)]. The rate of post-ERCP bleeding was significantly higher in EBS group [risk ratio (95% CI): 7.43 (2.45-22.53)]. We found no significant difference in rates of cholangitis, perforation, stent migration, and stent occlusion between groups. EBS does not decrease the risk of PEP in patients with MBO and is associated with increased risk of bleeding.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.80%
发文量
269
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology publishes papers reporting original clinical and scientific research which are of a high standard and which contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. The journal publishes three types of manuscript: in-depth reviews (by invitation only), full papers and case reports. Manuscripts submitted to the journal will be accepted on the understanding that the author has not previously submitted the paper to another journal or had the material published elsewhere. Authors are asked to disclose any affiliations, including financial, consultant, or institutional associations, that might lead to bias or a conflict of interest.
×
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