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}
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.
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.