首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Endoscopy International Open >EUS-guided biliary drainage is equivalent to ERCP for primary treatment of malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【2h】

EUS-guided biliary drainage is equivalent to ERCP for primary treatment of malignant distal biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:EUS引导的胆汁引流相当于ERCP对恶性远端胆道梗阻的主要治疗: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

>Background and study aims  Although endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is standard of care for malignant biliary obstruction, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a primary treatment has become increasingly utilized. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of EUS-BD for primary treatment of malignant biliary obstruction and comparison to traditional ERCP. >Methods  Individualized search strategies were developed through November 2018 using PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A cumulative meta-analysis was performed by calculating pooled proportions. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies comparing EUS-BD versus ERCP. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran Q test or I 2 statistics, and publication bias by funnel plot and Egger’s tests. >Results  Seven studies (n = 193 patients; 57.5 % males) evaluating primary EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction were included. Mean age was 67.4 years (2.3) followed an average of 5.4 months (1.0). For primary EUS-BD, pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse event (AE) rates were 95 % (95 % CI 91 – 98), 97 % (95 % CI 93 – 100), and 19 % (95 % CI 11 – 29), respectively. Among EUS-BD and ERCP comparator studies, technical and clinical success, and total AEs were not different with lower rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis and reintervention among the EUS-BD group. >Conclusion  Primary EUS-BD is an effective treatment with few AE. Comparing EUS-BD versus ERCP, EUS-BD has comparable efficacy and improved safety as a primary treatment for malignant biliary obstruction. Further randomized trials should be performed to identify patient populations and clinical scenarios in which primary EUS-BD would be most appropriate.
机译:>背景和研究目的:尽管内镜下逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)是治疗恶性胆道梗阻的标准治疗方法,但内镜超声引导下胆道引流(EUS-BD)作为主要治疗手段已得到越来越多的利用。这项研究的目的是进行系统的审查和荟萃分析,以评估EUS-BD在恶性胆道梗阻一级治疗中的有效性和安全性,并与传统ERCP进行比较。 >方法使用PRISMA和MOOSE指南,在2018年11月之前开发了个性化搜索策略。通过计算合并比例进行累积荟萃分析。进行亚组分析以比较EUS-BD与ERCP。异质性通过Cochran Q检验或I 2 统计数据进行评估,并通过漏斗图和Egger检验进行发布偏倚。 >结果 included包括七项评估原发性EUS-BD恶性胆道梗阻的研究(n = 193例;男性占57.5%)。平均年龄为67.4岁(2.3),平均为5.4个月(1.0)。对于原发性EUS-BD,合并的技术成功率,临床成功率和不良事件(AE)发生率分别为95%(95%CI 91 – 98),97%(95%CI 93 – 100)和19%(95%CI) 11 – 29)。在EUS-BD和ERCP对照研究中,EUS-BD组中的技术和临床成功率以及总AE均与ERCP后胰腺炎和再干预率较低无差异。 >结论主要的EUS-BD是一种有效的治疗方法,几乎​​没有AE。将EUS-BD与ERCP进行比较,EUS-BD作为恶性胆道梗阻的主要治疗方法具有可比的疗效和更高的安全性。应该进行进一步的随机试验,以确定最适合原发性EUS-BD的患者人群和临床情况。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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