常规和药物洗脱经动脉化疗栓塞治疗不能手术的肝内胆管癌患者:荟萃分析

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques Pub Date : 2024-11-05 eCollection Date: 2024-12-27 DOI:10.20452/wiitm.2024.17906
Su-Rong Pan, Xue-Wen Wo, Hong-Fang Zhu, Feng-Fei Xia
{"title":"常规和药物洗脱经动脉化疗栓塞治疗不能手术的肝内胆管癌患者:荟萃分析","authors":"Su-Rong Pan, Xue-Wen Wo, Hong-Fang Zhu, Feng-Fei Xia","doi":"10.20452/wiitm.2024.17906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In patients with inoperable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), both conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and drug‑eluting bead TACE (DEB‑TACE) can be employed as therapeutic interventions. However, the relative advantages of these strategies remain to be clarified.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This meta‑analysis was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of DEB‑TACE and cTACE in the treatment of ICC.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify publications that were pertinent to the present meta‑analysis. The primary outcome of interest was the overall survival (OS) rate. Secondary outcomes were progression‑free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse event (AE) rate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I 2 statistic, while publication bias was assessed with the Egger test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6 articles involving 283 and 178 patients who received cTACE and DEB‑TACE treatment, respectively, were included in this study. DEB‑TACE was superior to cTACE in terms of DCR (<i>P</i> = 0.004), PFS (<i>P</i> <0.001), and OS (<i>P</i> = 0.004), despite comparable pooled ORRs. No intergroup differences were observed with respect to AE occurrence. The ORR, DCR, and OS end points showed significant heterogeneity (I2 = 79%, I<sup>2</sup> = 61%, and I<sup>2</sup> = 95%, respectively). Additionally, the OS end point was subject to substantial publication bias (Egger test, <i>P</i> = 0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DEB‑TACE was shown to be superior to cTACE with respect to efficacy, while the safety profile of these 2 interventions was similar. Consequently, DEB‑TACE offers additional value in the management of inoperable ICC.</p>","PeriodicalId":49361,"journal":{"name":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","volume":"19 4","pages":"407-413"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11927539/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conventional and drug‑eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization in patients with inoperable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a meta‑analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Su-Rong Pan, Xue-Wen Wo, Hong-Fang Zhu, Feng-Fei Xia\",\"doi\":\"10.20452/wiitm.2024.17906\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In patients with inoperable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), both conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and drug‑eluting bead TACE (DEB‑TACE) can be employed as therapeutic interventions. However, the relative advantages of these strategies remain to be clarified.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This meta‑analysis was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of DEB‑TACE and cTACE in the treatment of ICC.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify publications that were pertinent to the present meta‑analysis. The primary outcome of interest was the overall survival (OS) rate. Secondary outcomes were progression‑free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse event (AE) rate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I 2 statistic, while publication bias was assessed with the Egger test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6 articles involving 283 and 178 patients who received cTACE and DEB‑TACE treatment, respectively, were included in this study. DEB‑TACE was superior to cTACE in terms of DCR (<i>P</i> = 0.004), PFS (<i>P</i> <0.001), and OS (<i>P</i> = 0.004), despite comparable pooled ORRs. No intergroup differences were observed with respect to AE occurrence. The ORR, DCR, and OS end points showed significant heterogeneity (I2 = 79%, I<sup>2</sup> = 61%, and I<sup>2</sup> = 95%, respectively). Additionally, the OS end point was subject to substantial publication bias (Egger test, <i>P</i> = 0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DEB‑TACE was shown to be superior to cTACE with respect to efficacy, while the safety profile of these 2 interventions was similar. Consequently, DEB‑TACE offers additional value in the management of inoperable ICC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques\",\"volume\":\"19 4\",\"pages\":\"407-413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11927539/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20452/wiitm.2024.17906\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20452/wiitm.2024.17906","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:对于无法手术的肝内胆管癌(ICC)患者,传统的经动脉化疗栓塞术(cTACE)和药物洗脱珠TACE(DEB-TACE)均可作为治疗手段。目的:本荟萃分析旨在比较 DEB-TACE 和 cTACE 治疗 ICC 的安全性和有效性:对Cochrane图书馆、PubMed和万方数据库进行了全面检索,以确定与本荟萃分析相关的出版物。主要研究结果为总生存率(OS)。次要结果为无进展生存期(PFS)、疾病控制率(DCR)、客观反应率(ORR)和不良事件率(AE)。异质性采用I 2统计量进行评估,发表偏倚采用Egger检验进行评估:本研究共纳入了 6 篇文章,分别涉及 283 名和 178 名接受 cTACE 和 DEB-TACE 治疗的患者。DEB-TACE在DCR(P = 0.004)和PFS(P P = 0.004)方面优于cTACE,尽管两者的总ORR相当。在AE发生率方面未观察到组间差异。ORR、DCR和OS终点显示出显著的异质性(分别为I2 = 79%、I2 = 61%和I2 = 95%)。此外,OS终点也存在很大的发表偏倚(Egger检验,P = 0.002):结论:DEB-TACE的疗效优于cTACE,而这两种干预方法的安全性相似。因此,DEB-TACE 为无法手术的 ICC 的治疗提供了更多价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conventional and drug‑eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization in patients with inoperable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a meta‑analysis.

Introduction: In patients with inoperable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), both conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and drug‑eluting bead TACE (DEB‑TACE) can be employed as therapeutic interventions. However, the relative advantages of these strategies remain to be clarified.

Aim: This meta‑analysis was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of DEB‑TACE and cTACE in the treatment of ICC.

Materials and methods: A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify publications that were pertinent to the present meta‑analysis. The primary outcome of interest was the overall survival (OS) rate. Secondary outcomes were progression‑free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse event (AE) rate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I 2 statistic, while publication bias was assessed with the Egger test.

Results: A total of 6 articles involving 283 and 178 patients who received cTACE and DEB‑TACE treatment, respectively, were included in this study. DEB‑TACE was superior to cTACE in terms of DCR (P = 0.004), PFS (P <0.001), and OS (P = 0.004), despite comparable pooled ORRs. No intergroup differences were observed with respect to AE occurrence. The ORR, DCR, and OS end points showed significant heterogeneity (I2 = 79%, I2 = 61%, and I2 = 95%, respectively). Additionally, the OS end point was subject to substantial publication bias (Egger test, P = 0.002).

Conclusions: DEB‑TACE was shown to be superior to cTACE with respect to efficacy, while the safety profile of these 2 interventions was similar. Consequently, DEB‑TACE offers additional value in the management of inoperable ICC.

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
2.80
自引率
23.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques serves as a forum for exchange of multidisciplinary experiences in fields such as: surgery, gynaecology, urology, gastroenterology, neurosurgery, ENT surgery, cardiac surgery, anaesthesiology and radiology, as well as other branches of medicine dealing with miniinvasive techniques.
×
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