Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage for Acute Cholangitis Secondary to Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Yash Shah, Sahib Singh, Dushyant S Dahiya, Ernesto Calderon-Martinez, Sneha A Sebastian, Manesh K Gangwani, Zohaib Ahmed, Saurabh Chandan, Babu Mohan, Rashmi Advani
{"title":"Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage for Acute Cholangitis Secondary to Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Yash Shah, Sahib Singh, Dushyant S Dahiya, Ernesto Calderon-Martinez, Sneha A Sebastian, Manesh K Gangwani, Zohaib Ahmed, Saurabh Chandan, Babu Mohan, Rashmi Advani","doi":"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary treatment for biliary obstruction, yet fails in 5% to 7% of cases, necessitating alternative therapeutic options like endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). With acute cholangitis posing significant morbidity and mortality risks, assessing the safety and efficacy of EUS-BD in these patients is vital. This is the first meta-analysis with a subgroup analysis assessing the outcomes of EUS-BD in patients with acute cholangitis secondary to biliary obstruction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane databases until December 23, 2023. Studies involving adult patients undergoing EUS-BD for cholangitis were included. Outcomes assessed were pooled technical and clinical success rates, complications, and mortality. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 % statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the included 5 studies (109 patients), EUS-BD achieved a pooled technical success rate of 95.5% (95% CI: 91.0-98.5) and a clinical success rate of 92.1% (95% CI: 86.4-96.3), with low heterogeneity across studies ( I2 : 0.00% for both outcomes). The pooled complication rate was 12.2% (95% CI: 5.1-21.8, I2 : 37.46%), with predominantly mild and self-limiting complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EUS-BD demonstrated excellent pooled technical and clinical success rates, particularly when ERCP is not feasible in patients with acute cholangitis secondary to biliary obstruction. Most postprocedure complication rates are also mild and self-limiting making EUS-BD a possible alternative for the management of patients with cholangitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":22092,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001386","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary treatment for biliary obstruction, yet fails in 5% to 7% of cases, necessitating alternative therapeutic options like endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD). With acute cholangitis posing significant morbidity and mortality risks, assessing the safety and efficacy of EUS-BD in these patients is vital. This is the first meta-analysis with a subgroup analysis assessing the outcomes of EUS-BD in patients with acute cholangitis secondary to biliary obstruction.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane databases until December 23, 2023. Studies involving adult patients undergoing EUS-BD for cholangitis were included. Outcomes assessed were pooled technical and clinical success rates, complications, and mortality. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 % statistics.

Results: Among the included 5 studies (109 patients), EUS-BD achieved a pooled technical success rate of 95.5% (95% CI: 91.0-98.5) and a clinical success rate of 92.1% (95% CI: 86.4-96.3), with low heterogeneity across studies ( I2 : 0.00% for both outcomes). The pooled complication rate was 12.2% (95% CI: 5.1-21.8, I2 : 37.46%), with predominantly mild and self-limiting complications.

Conclusion: EUS-BD demonstrated excellent pooled technical and clinical success rates, particularly when ERCP is not feasible in patients with acute cholangitis secondary to biliary obstruction. Most postprocedure complication rates are also mild and self-limiting making EUS-BD a possible alternative for the management of patients with cholangitis.

超声内镜引导下胆道引流治疗继发于胆道梗阻的急性胆管炎:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:内镜逆行胆管造影(ERCP)仍然是胆道梗阻的主要治疗方法,但在5%至7%的病例中失败,需要其他治疗选择,如内镜超声引导胆道引流(EUS-BD)。由于急性胆管炎具有显著的发病率和死亡率风险,因此评估EUS-BD在这些患者中的安全性和有效性至关重要。这是首个采用亚组分析评估EUS-BD对继发于胆道梗阻的急性胆管炎患者预后的meta分析。方法:根据PRISMA指南,检索MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov和Cochrane数据库,进行系统评价和荟萃分析,直至2023年12月23日。纳入了接受EUS-BD治疗胆管炎的成年患者的研究。评估的结果包括技术和临床成功率、并发症和死亡率。采用随机效应模型的标准荟萃分析方法,采用I2%统计量评估异质性。结果:在纳入的5项研究(109例患者)中,EUS-BD的总技术成功率为95.5% (95% CI: 91.0-98.5),临床成功率为92.1% (95% CI: 86.4-96.3),研究间的异质性较低(I2: 0.00%)。合并并发症发生率为12.2% (95% CI: 5.1 ~ 21.8, I2: 37.46%),以轻度和自限性并发症为主。结论:EUS-BD具有出色的综合技术和临床成功率,特别是当ERCP不能用于继发于胆道梗阻的急性胆管炎患者时。大多数术后并发症发生率也较轻且具有自限性,使EUS-BD成为胆管炎患者治疗的可能选择。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
103
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques is a primary source for peer-reviewed, original articles on the newest techniques and applications in operative laparoscopy and endoscopy. Its Editorial Board includes many of the surgeons who pioneered the use of these revolutionary techniques. The journal provides complete, timely, accurate, practical coverage of laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques and procedures; current clinical and basic science research; preoperative and postoperative patient management; complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery; and new developments in instrumentation and technology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信