首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Endoscopic Ultrasound >Lumen apposing metal stents in drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis are they any better than plastic stents? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published since the revised Atlanta classification of pancreatic fluid collections
【2h】

Lumen apposing metal stents in drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis are they any better than plastic stents? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published since the revised Atlanta classification of pancreatic fluid collections

机译:在胰腺壁坏死引流中采用金属支架的管腔是否比塑料支架更好?自修订亚特兰大胰腺液收集分类以来发表的研究的系统评价和荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are increasingly being used in the drainage of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). Best choice of stent is subject to argument, and studies are varied in the reported outcomes between LAMS and plastic stents (PS) to this end. We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (earliest inception through July 2018) to identify studies that reported on the use of LAMS and PS in WON drainage. Studies published since the release of the revised Atlanta classification for pancreatic fluid collections (2014 to current) were included in the analysis. The outcomes were to estimate and compare the pooled rates of clinical success, and adverse-events. A total of 9 studies (737 patients) for LAMS and 6 studies (527 patients) for PS were included in the analysis. The pooled rate of clinical-success with LAMS was 88.5% (95% CI 82.5-92.6, I2 = 71.7) and with PS was 88.1% (95% CI 80.5-93.0, I2 = 78.1) and the difference was not statistically significant, P = 0.93. No difference was noted in the pooled rates of all adverse-events, LAMS: 11.2% (6.8-17.9, I2 = 82.0); vs PS: 15.9% (8.4-27.8, I2 = 78.8); P = 0.38. Based on our meta-analysis, LAMS and PS demonstrate equal clinical outcomes and equal adverse-events in the drainage of pancreatic WON.
机译:流明的金属支架(LAMS)越来越多地用于胰腺壁坏死(WON)的引流中。支架的最佳选择尚有争议,为此目的,LAMS和塑料支架(PS)之间报道的结局研究存在差异。我们对多个电子数据库和会议记录进行了全面搜索,包括PubMed,EMBASE和Web of Science数据库(最早成立于2018年7月),以鉴定报告WON引流中使用LAMS和PS的研究。自修订的亚特兰大胰腺液分类标准发布以来(2014年至今)发表的研究均纳入分析。结果是估计和比较临床成功率和不良事件的合并率。分析总共包括9项LAMS研究(737例患者)和6项PS研究(527例患者)。 LAMS的临床成功率是88.5%(95%CI 82.5-92.6,I 2 = 71.7),而PS的临床成功率是88.1%(95%CI 80.5-93.0,I 2 = 78.1),差异无统计学意义,P = 0.93。 LAMS的所有不良事件合并率均无差异:11.2%(6.8-17.9,I 2 = 82.0); vs PS:15.9%(8.4-27.8,I 2 = 78.8); P = 0.38。根据我们的荟萃分析,LAMS和PS在胰腺WON引流中显示出相同的临床结果和相同的不良事件。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号