Zhu Liang, Wang Zhenwen, Huang Zhiquan, Yang Xueping, Yu Zhengping, Cao Ronglai, Chen Youxiang
Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi 330006, P.R. China.
Jiangxi Clinical Research Center for Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi 330006, P.R. China.
Exp Ther Med. 2023 May 5;25(6):297. doi: 10.3892/etm.2023.11996. eCollection 2023 Jun.
Both covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs) and uncovered self-expandable metal stents (USEMSs) have been tried in the palliation of malignant distal biliary strictures by means of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, the comparison of efficacy and safety between them remains contested. To the best of our knowledge, no similar studies have assessed this in the Chinese population. In the present study, the clinical and endoscopic data of 238 patients (CSEMSs, n=55; USEMSs, n=183) with malignant distal biliary strictures from 2014 to 2019 were collected. The efficacy indicated by mean stent patency, stent patency rate, mean patient survival time and survival rate, and the safety indicated by adverse events after CSEMS or USEMS placement were retrospectively analyzed and compared. The mean stent patency time was significantly longer in the CSEMSs group than that in the USEMSs group (262.8±195.3 days vs. 169.5±155.7 days, P=0.002). The mean patient survival time was significantly longer in the CSEMSs group than that in the USEMSs group (273.9±197.6 days vs. 184.9±167.6 days, P=0.003). The stent patency rate and patient survival rate were significantly higher in the CSEMSs group than those in the USEMSs group at 6 and 12 months, but not at 1 and 3 months. There was no significant difference in stent dysfunction and adverse events between the two groups, although post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) occurred more frequently in the CSEMSs group than in the USEMSs group (18.1% vs. 8.8%, P=0.049). In conclusion, CSEMSs were better than USEMSs for malignant distal biliary strictures in terms of stent patency time and patient survival time as well as stent patency rate and patient survival rate in the long term (>6 months). Adverse events in the two groups occurred at a similar rate, although the incidence of PEP was higher in the CSEMSs group.
带膜自膨式金属支架(CSEMSs)和裸金属自膨式支架(USEMSs)均已尝试通过内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)来缓解恶性远端胆管狭窄;然而,两者之间疗效和安全性的比较仍存在争议。据我们所知,尚无类似研究对中国人群进行过评估。在本研究中,收集了2014年至2019年238例恶性远端胆管狭窄患者(CSEMSs组55例;USEMSs组183例)的临床和内镜数据。对CSEMS或USEMS置入术后以平均支架通畅时间、支架通畅率、平均患者生存时间和生存率表示的疗效,以及以不良事件表示的安全性进行回顾性分析和比较。CSEMSs组的平均支架通畅时间显著长于USEMSs组(262.8±195.3天对169.5±155.7天,P=0.002)。CSEMSs组的平均患者生存时间显著长于USEMSs组(273.9±197.6天对184.9±167.6天,P=0.003)。在6个月和12个月时,CSEMSs组的支架通畅率和患者生存率显著高于USEMSs组,但在1个月和3个月时并非如此。两组之间支架功能障碍和不良事件无显著差异,尽管CSEMSs组ERCP术后胰腺炎(PEP)的发生率高于USEMSs组(18.1%对8.8%,P=0.049)。总之,就支架通畅时间、患者生存时间以及长期(>6个月)的支架通畅率和患者生存率而言,CSEMSs在治疗恶性远端胆管狭窄方面优于USEMSs。两组不良事件发生率相似,尽管CSEMSs组PEP的发生率较高。