内镜超声引导下肝胃切除术和胆总管十二指肠造口术治疗远端恶性胆道梗阻的长期疗效比较:一项多中心回顾性研究。

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-03-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/17562848241239551
Dongwook Oh, Sung Yong Han, Sang Hyub Lee, Seong-Hun Kim, Woo Hyun Paik, Hyung-Ku Chon, Tae Jun Song, Se Woo Park, Jae Hee Cho
{"title":"内镜超声引导下肝胃切除术和胆总管十二指肠造口术治疗远端恶性胆道梗阻的长期疗效比较:一项多中心回顾性研究。","authors":"Dongwook Oh, Sung Yong Han, Sang Hyub Lee, Seong-Hun Kim, Woo Hyun Paik, Hyung-Ku Chon, Tae Jun Song, Se Woo Park, Jae Hee Cho","doi":"10.1177/17562848241239551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), classified as choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), is a feasible and effective alternative for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. However, the preferred technique for better outcomes has not yet been evaluated.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We compared the long-term outcomes between the techniques.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS or EUS-HGS with transmural stent placement for distal MBO between 2009 and 2022. The primary outcome was the stent patency. The secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs) of each technique, and independent risk factors for stent dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 115 patients were divided into EUS-CDS (<i>n</i> = 56) and EUS-HGS (<i>n</i> = 59) groups. Among them, technical success was achieved in 98.2% of EUS-CDS and 96.6% of EUS-HGS groups. Furthermore, clinical success was 96.4% in EUS-CDS and 88.1% in EUS-HGS groups, without significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.200). The mean duration of stent patency for EUS-CDS was 770.3 days while that for EUS-HGS was 164.9 days (<i>p</i> = 0.010). In addition, the only independent risk factor for stent dysfunction was systematic treatment after EUS-BD [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.238 (0.066-0.863), <i>p</i> = 0.029]. The incidence of stent dysfunction of EUS-HGS was higher than EUS-CDS (35.1% <i>versus</i> 18.2%, 0.071), despite no significant differences even in late AEs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In distal MBO, EUS-CDS may be better than EUS-HGS with longer stent patency and fewer AEs. Furthermore, systematic treatment after EUS-BD is recommended for the improvement of stent patency.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953094/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of long-term outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Dongwook Oh, Sung Yong Han, Sang Hyub Lee, Seong-Hun Kim, Woo Hyun Paik, Hyung-Ku Chon, Tae Jun Song, Se Woo Park, Jae Hee Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17562848241239551\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), classified as choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), is a feasible and effective alternative for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. However, the preferred technique for better outcomes has not yet been evaluated.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We compared the long-term outcomes between the techniques.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS or EUS-HGS with transmural stent placement for distal MBO between 2009 and 2022. The primary outcome was the stent patency. The secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs) of each technique, and independent risk factors for stent dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 115 patients were divided into EUS-CDS (<i>n</i> = 56) and EUS-HGS (<i>n</i> = 59) groups. Among them, technical success was achieved in 98.2% of EUS-CDS and 96.6% of EUS-HGS groups. Furthermore, clinical success was 96.4% in EUS-CDS and 88.1% in EUS-HGS groups, without significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.200). The mean duration of stent patency for EUS-CDS was 770.3 days while that for EUS-HGS was 164.9 days (<i>p</i> = 0.010). In addition, the only independent risk factor for stent dysfunction was systematic treatment after EUS-BD [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.238 (0.066-0.863), <i>p</i> = 0.029]. The incidence of stent dysfunction of EUS-HGS was higher than EUS-CDS (35.1% <i>versus</i> 18.2%, 0.071), despite no significant differences even in late AEs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In distal MBO, EUS-CDS may be better than EUS-HGS with longer stent patency and fewer AEs. Furthermore, systematic treatment after EUS-BD is recommended for the improvement of stent patency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953094/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848241239551\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848241239551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:内镜超声引导胆道引流术(EUS-BD)分为胆总管十二指肠造口术(CDS)和肝胃造口术(HGS),是治疗内镜逆行胰胆管造影术失败的远端恶性胆道梗阻(MBO)的可行且有效的替代方法。然而,目前尚未评估哪种技术更能取得更好的疗效:我们比较了两种技术的长期疗效:设计:回顾性比较研究:方法:我们回顾了 2009 年至 2022 年间接受 EUS-CDS 或 EUS-HGS 经壁支架置入术治疗远端 MBO 的连续患者。主要结果是支架的通畅性。次要结果是技术和临床成功率、每种技术的不良事件(AEs)以及支架功能障碍的独立风险因素:共有 115 例患者被分为 EUS-CDS 组(56 例)和 EUS-HGS 组(59 例)。其中,EUS-CDS 组技术成功率为 98.2%,EUS-HGS 组为 96.6%。此外,EUS-CDS 组和 EUS-HGS 组的临床成功率分别为 96.4% 和 88.1%,无显著差异(P = 0.200)。EUS-CDS 的平均支架通畅时间为 770.3 天,而 EUS-HGS 为 164.9 天(P = 0.010)。此外,支架功能障碍的唯一独立危险因素是 EUS-BD 后的系统治疗[危险比和 95% 置信区间为 0.238 (0.066-0.863),p = 0.029]。EUS-HGS的支架功能障碍发生率高于EUS-CDS(35.1%对18.2%,0.071),尽管即使在晚期AE方面也没有显著差异:结论:对于远端 MBO,EUS-CDS 可能比 EUS-HGS 更好,支架通畅时间更长,AEs 更少。结论:对于远端 MBO,EUS-CDS 的效果可能优于 EUS-HGS,其支架通畅时间更长,AEs 更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of long-term outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy and choledochoduodenostomy for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study.

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), classified as choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), is a feasible and effective alternative for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. However, the preferred technique for better outcomes has not yet been evaluated.

Objectives: We compared the long-term outcomes between the techniques.

Design: Retrospective comparative study.

Methods: We reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-CDS or EUS-HGS with transmural stent placement for distal MBO between 2009 and 2022. The primary outcome was the stent patency. The secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs) of each technique, and independent risk factors for stent dysfunction.

Results: In all, 115 patients were divided into EUS-CDS (n = 56) and EUS-HGS (n = 59) groups. Among them, technical success was achieved in 98.2% of EUS-CDS and 96.6% of EUS-HGS groups. Furthermore, clinical success was 96.4% in EUS-CDS and 88.1% in EUS-HGS groups, without significant difference (p = 0.200). The mean duration of stent patency for EUS-CDS was 770.3 days while that for EUS-HGS was 164.9 days (p = 0.010). In addition, the only independent risk factor for stent dysfunction was systematic treatment after EUS-BD [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.238 (0.066-0.863), p = 0.029]. The incidence of stent dysfunction of EUS-HGS was higher than EUS-CDS (35.1% versus 18.2%, 0.071), despite no significant differences even in late AEs.

Conclusion: In distal MBO, EUS-CDS may be better than EUS-HGS with longer stent patency and fewer AEs. Furthermore, systematic treatment after EUS-BD is recommended for the improvement of stent patency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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