Suppr超能文献

内镜超声引导下胆囊引流与经皮胆囊造口术治疗高危手术患者急性胆囊炎的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy for high risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, North District Hospital, Sheung Shui, Hong Kong.

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States.

出版信息

Endoscopy. 2019 Aug;51(8):722-732. doi: 10.1055/a-0929-6603. Epub 2019 Jun 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is an effective and safe alternative to percutaneous drainage (PT-GBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two procedures in high risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted for all articles published up to October 2017 to identify comparative studies between EUS-GBD and PT-GBD. A meta-analysis was performed on outcomes including technical success, clinical success, post-procedure adverse events, length of hospital stay, unplanned hospital readmission, need for reintervention, recurrent cholecystitis, and disease- or treatment-related mortality for these two procedures.

RESULTS

Five comparative studies (206 patients in the EUS-GBD group vs. 289 patients in the PT-GBD group), were included in the final analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in technical success (odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 1.58;  = 0.21;  = 0 %) and clinical success (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 0.36 to 3.16;  = 0.90;  = 44 %) between the two procedures. EUS-GBD had fewer adverse events than PT-GBD (OR 0.43, 95 %CI 0.18 to 1.00;  = 0.05;  = 66 %). Moreover, patients undergoing EUS-GBD had shorter hospital stays, with pooled standard mean difference of - 2.53 (95 %CI - 4.28 to - 0.78;  = 0.005;  = 98 %), and required significantly fewer reinterventions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.04 to 0.042; 0.001;  = 32 %) resulting in significantly fewer unplanned readmissions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.05 to 0.53;  = 0.003;  = 79 %).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-GBD was associated with lower rates of post-procedure adverse events, shorter hospital stays, and fewer reinterventions and readmissions compared with PT-GBD in patients with acute cholecystitis who were unfit for surgery.

摘要

背景

最近的证据表明,内镜超声引导下胆囊引流(EUS-GBD)是一种替代经皮引流(PT-GBD)的有效且安全的方法。我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,比较了这两种方法在患有急性胆囊炎的高危手术患者中的效果。

方法

对截至 2017 年 10 月发表的所有文章进行全面的电子文献检索,以确定 EUS-GBD 和 PT-GBD 之间的比较研究。对两种方法的技术成功率、临床成功率、术后不良事件、住院时间、非计划住院再入院、需要再次干预、复发性胆囊炎以及疾病或治疗相关死亡率等结果进行荟萃分析。

结果

最终纳入了 5 项比较研究(EUS-GBD 组 206 例,PT-GBD 组 289 例)。两种方法在技术成功率(比值比 [OR] 0.43,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.12 至 1.58;  = 0.21;  = 0%)和临床成功率(OR 1.07,95%CI 0.36 至 3.16;  = 0.90;  = 44%)方面无统计学差异。EUS-GBD 术后不良事件发生率低于 PT-GBD(OR 0.43,95%CI 0.18 至 1.00;  = 0.05;  = 66%)。此外,EUS-GBD 组患者的住院时间更短,合并标准均数差为 -2.53(95%CI -4.28 至 -0.78;  = 0.005;  = 98%),需要再次干预的次数明显减少(OR 0.16,95%CI 0.04 至 0.042; 0.001;  = 32%),导致非计划再入院的次数明显减少(OR 0.16,95%CI 0.05 至 0.53;  = 0.003;  = 79%)。

结论

对于不适合手术的急性胆囊炎患者,EUS-GBD 与 PT-GBD 相比,术后不良事件发生率较低、住院时间较短、再次干预和再入院的次数较少。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验