使用管腔贴合金属支架或不使用同轴塑料支架在 EUS 引导下引流胰腺积液:系统综述与元分析》。

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Faisal Kamal, Muhammad Ali Khan, Wade Lee-Smith, Sachit Sharma, Ashu Acharya, Umer Farooq, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Aamir Saeed, Muhammad Aziz, Umar Hayat, Nasir Saleem, Anand Kumar, Alexander Schlachterman, Thomas Kowalski
{"title":"使用管腔贴合金属支架或不使用同轴塑料支架在 EUS 引导下引流胰腺积液:系统综述与元分析》。","authors":"Faisal Kamal, Muhammad Ali Khan, Wade Lee-Smith, Sachit Sharma, Ashu Acharya, Umer Farooq, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Aamir Saeed, Muhammad Aziz, Umar Hayat, Nasir Saleem, Anand Kumar, Alexander Schlachterman, Thomas Kowalski","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Co-axial plastic double pigtail stents (DPSs) are commonly placed through lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to decrease the risk of adverse events. In this meta-analysis, we have compared the outcomes of LAMS plus co-axial DPS versus LAMS alone in patients with PFCs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed several databases to identify the studies that compared outcomes of LAMS with DPS to LAMS without DPS in the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were overall adverse events, clinical success and individual adverse events such as stent (LAMS) migration, stent occlusion, bleeding, and infection. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the analysis of outcomes. We used a random effects model to analyze the data. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 10 studies with 685 patients. Rate of overall adverse events was significantly lower in the LAMS+DPS group compared with LAMS alone, RR (95% CI) 0.58 (0.40, 0.87). There was no significant difference in the rate of clinical success between groups, RR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.94, 1.13). We found no significant difference in rate of stent occlusion between groups. Rate of infection was significantly lower in LAMS+DPS group, RR (95% CI) 0.46 (0.24, 0.85). There was no significant difference in rate of bleeding and stent (LAMS) migration between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Addition of co-axial DPS to LAMS decreases the risk of adverse events in patients with PFCs and should be considered in all patients with PFCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EUS-guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections Using Lumen Apposing Metal Stents With or Without Coaxial Plastic Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Faisal Kamal, Muhammad Ali Khan, Wade Lee-Smith, Sachit Sharma, Ashu Acharya, Umer Farooq, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Aamir Saeed, Muhammad Aziz, Umar Hayat, Nasir Saleem, Anand Kumar, Alexander Schlachterman, Thomas Kowalski\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002080\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Co-axial plastic double pigtail stents (DPSs) are commonly placed through lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to decrease the risk of adverse events. In this meta-analysis, we have compared the outcomes of LAMS plus co-axial DPS versus LAMS alone in patients with PFCs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed several databases to identify the studies that compared outcomes of LAMS with DPS to LAMS without DPS in the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were overall adverse events, clinical success and individual adverse events such as stent (LAMS) migration, stent occlusion, bleeding, and infection. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the analysis of outcomes. We used a random effects model to analyze the data. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 10 studies with 685 patients. Rate of overall adverse events was significantly lower in the LAMS+DPS group compared with LAMS alone, RR (95% CI) 0.58 (0.40, 0.87). There was no significant difference in the rate of clinical success between groups, RR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.94, 1.13). We found no significant difference in rate of stent occlusion between groups. Rate of infection was significantly lower in LAMS+DPS group, RR (95% CI) 0.46 (0.24, 0.85). There was no significant difference in rate of bleeding and stent (LAMS) migration between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Addition of co-axial DPS to LAMS decreases the risk of adverse events in patients with PFCs and should be considered in all patients with PFCs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-11\",\"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.0000000000002080\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002080","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

摘要

背景和目的:在胰腺积液(PFC)患者中,同轴塑料双尾支架(DPS)通常通过腔内贴壁金属支架(LAMS)放置,以降低不良事件的风险。在这项荟萃分析中,我们比较了 LAMS 加同轴 DPS 与单用 LAMS 治疗 PFCs 患者的结果:我们查阅了多个数据库,以确定在治疗 PFCs 时比较 LAMS 加 DPS 与 LAMS 不加 DPS 的疗效的研究。我们关注的结果是总体不良事件、临床成功率和单个不良事件,如支架(LAMS)移位、支架闭塞、出血和感染。我们计算了汇总风险比 (RR) 和 95% 置信区间 (CI),用于结果分析。我们采用随机效应模型分析数据。使用 I2 统计量评估异质性:我们纳入了 10 项研究,共 685 名患者。与单独使用 LAMS 相比,LAMS+DPS 组的总体不良事件发生率明显降低,RR(95% CI)为 0.58 (0.40, 0.87)。各组的临床成功率(RR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.94, 1.13))无明显差异。我们发现不同组间的支架闭塞率无明显差异。LAMS+DPS 组的感染率明显较低,RR(95% CI)为 0.46 (0.24, 0.85)。各组间的出血率和支架(LAMS)移位率无明显差异:结论:在 LAMS 中加入同轴 DPS 可降低 PFC 患者发生不良事件的风险,所有 PFC 患者均应考虑使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EUS-guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections Using Lumen Apposing Metal Stents With or Without Coaxial Plastic Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background and aims: Co-axial plastic double pigtail stents (DPSs) are commonly placed through lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) in patients with pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to decrease the risk of adverse events. In this meta-analysis, we have compared the outcomes of LAMS plus co-axial DPS versus LAMS alone in patients with PFCs.

Methods: We reviewed several databases to identify the studies that compared outcomes of LAMS with DPS to LAMS without DPS in the treatment of PFCs. Our outcomes of interest were overall adverse events, clinical success and individual adverse events such as stent (LAMS) migration, stent occlusion, bleeding, and infection. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the analysis of outcomes. We used a random effects model to analyze the data. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

Results: We included 10 studies with 685 patients. Rate of overall adverse events was significantly lower in the LAMS+DPS group compared with LAMS alone, RR (95% CI) 0.58 (0.40, 0.87). There was no significant difference in the rate of clinical success between groups, RR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.94, 1.13). We found no significant difference in rate of stent occlusion between groups. Rate of infection was significantly lower in LAMS+DPS group, RR (95% CI) 0.46 (0.24, 0.85). There was no significant difference in rate of bleeding and stent (LAMS) migration between groups.

Conclusions: Addition of co-axial DPS to LAMS decreases the risk of adverse events in patients with PFCs and should be considered in all patients with PFCs.

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
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