Sawas Tarek, Arwani Noura, Al Halabi Shadi, Vargo John
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Endosc Int Open. 2017 Feb;5(2):E103-E109. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-120412.
To investigate the role of endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) with endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) in acute severe obstructive cholangitis management by performing a meta-analysis of controlled trials. We searched PubMed and Embase for controlled studies that compared endoscopic drainage with ES versus Non-ES in acute obstructive cholangitis. Two reviewers selected the studies and extracted the data. Disagreement was addressed by a third reviewer. Heterogeneity of the studies was analyzed by Cochran's Q statistics. A Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio was calculated utilizing a random effects model. Four controlled studies met our inclusion criteria with 392 participants (201 ES, 191 Non-ES). The outcomes were drainage insertion success rate, drainage effectiveness, post drainage pancreatitis, bleeding, procedure duration, perforation, cholecystitis, and 30-day mortality. Drainage insertion success rate was identical in both groups (RR: 1.00, 95 %CI% 0.96 - 1.04). Effective drainage was not significantly different (RR: 1.11, 95 %CI 0.73 - 1.7). There was no significant difference in the incidence of pancreatitis post EBD between the ES and Non-ES groups at 3 % and 4 %, respectively (RR: 0.73, 95 %CI 0.24 - 2.27). However, there was a significant increase in post EBD bleeding with ES compared to Non-ES (RR: 8.58, 95 %CI 2.03 - 36.34). Thirty-day mortality was similar between ES and Non-ES groups at 0.7 % and 1 %, respectively (RR: 0.5, 95 %CI 0.05 - 5.28). Our findings show that EBD without ES is an effective drainage technique and carries less risk for post procedure bleeding. Patients who are critically ill and have coagulopathy should be spared from undergoing ES in the acute phase.
通过对对照试验进行荟萃分析,探讨内镜括约肌切开术(ES)联合内镜胆道引流术(EBD)在急性重症梗阻性胆管炎治疗中的作用。我们在PubMed和Embase数据库中检索了比较内镜下ES联合引流与单纯内镜引流治疗急性梗阻性胆管炎的对照研究。两名审阅者筛选研究并提取数据,分歧由第三名审阅者解决。采用Cochran's Q统计量分析研究的异质性,利用随机效应模型计算Mantel-Haenszel风险比。四项对照研究符合纳入标准,共392名参与者(201例接受ES联合引流,191例接受单纯内镜引流)。观察指标包括引流管置入成功率、引流效果、引流后胰腺炎、出血、手术时长、穿孔、胆囊炎及30天死亡率。两组的引流管置入成功率相同(RR:1.00,95%CI 0.96 - 1.04)。有效引流方面无显著差异(RR:1.11,95%CI 0.73 - 1.7)。ES组和单纯内镜引流组引流后胰腺炎的发生率分别为3%和4%,无显著差异(RR:0.73,95%CI 0.24 - 2.27)。然而,与单纯内镜引流相比,ES组引流后出血显著增加(RR:8.58,95%CI 2.03 - 36.34)。ES组和单纯内镜引流组的30天死亡率分别为0.7%和1%,相似(RR:0.5,95%CI 0.05 - 5.28)。我们的研究结果表明,不进行ES的EBD是一种有效的引流技术,且术后出血风险较低。病情危重且有凝血功能障碍的患者在急性期应避免接受ES治疗。