Park Chan Hyuk, Park Se Woo, Jung Jang Han, Jung Eun Suk, Kim Jung Hee, Park Da Hae
Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Guri 11923, Korea.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong 18450, Korea.
J Pers Med. 2021 Jan 30;11(2):86. doi: 10.3390/jpm11020086.
Although many studies have investigated the efficacy of stent placement for patients with malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction, the clinical outcomes and adverse events of biliary stenting have not been comprehensively evaluated. We searched all relevant randomized-controlled trials that evaluated the comparative efficacy of biliary stents, including the plastic stents, uncovered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), and covered SEMSs in patients with malignant extrahepatic biliary obstructions. Twenty-one studies with 2326 patients were included. Both uncovered and covered SEMSs had a lower risk of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) compared to plastic stents (risk ratio (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): uncovered vs. plastic, 0.46 (0.35-0.62); covered vs. plastic, 0.46 (0.34-0.62)). A comparison of the groups using SEMSs revealed that tumor ingrowth was common in the uncovered SEMS group, while stent migration, tumor overgrowth, and occlusion by sludge were common in the covered SEMS group; however, the overall risk of RBO did not differ between these groups (RR (95% CI): uncovered vs. covered: 1.02 (0.80-1.30)). Although the main causes of RBO vary across stents, RBO risk was similar between uncovered and covered SEMS groups. Both SEMSs have superior efficacy in terms of RBO compared to plastic stents.
尽管许多研究已经调查了支架置入术对恶性肝外胆管梗阻患者的疗效,但胆管支架置入术的临床结局和不良事件尚未得到全面评估。我们检索了所有评估胆管支架(包括塑料支架、裸金属自膨式支架(SEMS)和覆膜SEMS)在恶性肝外胆管梗阻患者中比较疗效的相关随机对照试验。纳入了21项研究,共2326例患者。与塑料支架相比,裸金属和覆膜SEMS的复发性胆管梗阻(RBO)风险均较低(风险比(RR)(95%置信区间[CI]):裸金属与塑料相比,0.46(0.35 - 0.62);覆膜与塑料相比,0.46(0.34 - 0.62))。对使用SEMS的组进行比较发现,裸金属SEMS组肿瘤向内生长常见,而覆膜SEMS组支架迁移、肿瘤过度生长和胆泥阻塞常见;然而,这些组之间RBO的总体风险没有差异(RR(95%CI):裸金属与覆膜相比:1.02(0.80 - 1.30))。尽管不同支架导致RBO的主要原因各不相同,但裸金属和覆膜SEMS组之间的RBO风险相似。与塑料支架相比,两种SEMS在RBO方面均具有更好的疗效。