Long slim versus conventional self-expandable metallic stent in bilateral endoscopic side-by-side deployment for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction.

IF 6.7 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Ling Xing, Yan-Ting Liu, Xin Ye, Tian-Tian Wang, Jun Wu, Ming-Xing Xia, Bing Hu, Dao-Jian Gao
{"title":"Long slim versus conventional self-expandable metallic stent in bilateral endoscopic side-by-side deployment for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction.","authors":"Ling Xing, Yan-Ting Liu, Xin Ye, Tian-Tian Wang, Jun Wu, Ming-Xing Xia, Bing Hu, Dao-Jian Gao","doi":"10.1016/j.gie.2025.01.040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The goal of this study was to compare the advantages of long slim metal stents (LSMSs) versus conventional metal stents in bilateral endoscopic side-by-side (SBS) deployment for malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 140 consecutive patients with MHBO treated by endoscopic bilateral SBS deployment at a high-volume tertiary referral center were analyzed retrospectively; this included 50 patients in the LSMS group and the other 90 patients in the conventional SBS group as control. Propensity score matching at a 1:2 ratio was used to reduce selection bias. The primary outcome was stent patency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, no significant difference was observed in stent patency (267 vs 268 days; P = .923) or overall survival (225 vs 211 days; P = .883) between the 2 groups. The technical success rate was 100% in both groups, and the clinical success rate was 91.1% in the LSMS group and 92.9% in the control group (P = .735). Early and late adverse events were similar (24.4% vs 34.3%, P = .423; 42.2% vs 38.6%, P = .697); the procedure time and bilateral metal stenting time in the LSMS group were significantly shorter (41.0 minutes vs 57.5 minutes, P = .000; 19.0 minutes vs 28.5 minutes, P = .000). The success rate of endoscopic bilateral revisionary stent insertion in the LSMS group was also higher (100% vs 33.3%; P = .000).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bilateral LSMS placement is a viable option for patients with MHBO. It includes advantages of less operative difficulty and easier future re-intervention over conventional SBS stenting.</p>","PeriodicalId":12542,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2025.01.040","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: The goal of this study was to compare the advantages of long slim metal stents (LSMSs) versus conventional metal stents in bilateral endoscopic side-by-side (SBS) deployment for malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO).

Methods: A total of 140 consecutive patients with MHBO treated by endoscopic bilateral SBS deployment at a high-volume tertiary referral center were analyzed retrospectively; this included 50 patients in the LSMS group and the other 90 patients in the conventional SBS group as control. Propensity score matching at a 1:2 ratio was used to reduce selection bias. The primary outcome was stent patency.

Results: After propensity score matching, no significant difference was observed in stent patency (267 vs 268 days; P = .923) or overall survival (225 vs 211 days; P = .883) between the 2 groups. The technical success rate was 100% in both groups, and the clinical success rate was 91.1% in the LSMS group and 92.9% in the control group (P = .735). Early and late adverse events were similar (24.4% vs 34.3%, P = .423; 42.2% vs 38.6%, P = .697); the procedure time and bilateral metal stenting time in the LSMS group were significantly shorter (41.0 minutes vs 57.5 minutes, P = .000; 19.0 minutes vs 28.5 minutes, P = .000). The success rate of endoscopic bilateral revisionary stent insertion in the LSMS group was also higher (100% vs 33.3%; P = .000).

Conclusions: Bilateral LSMS placement is a viable option for patients with MHBO. It includes advantages of less operative difficulty and easier future re-intervention over conventional SBS stenting.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Gastrointestinal endoscopy 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
7.80%
发文量
1441
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy is a journal publishing original, peer-reviewed articles on endoscopic procedures for studying, diagnosing, and treating digestive diseases. It covers outcomes research, prospective studies, and controlled trials of new endoscopic instruments and treatment methods. The online features include full-text articles, video and audio clips, and MEDLINE links. The journal serves as an international forum for the latest developments in the specialty, offering challenging reports from authorities worldwide. It also publishes abstracts of significant articles from other clinical publications, accompanied by expert commentaries.
×
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