...
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy International Open >Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:结肠支架与急诊手术治疗姑息性结肠恶性阻塞的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Background and study aims Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) due to CRC occurs in 8?% to 29?% of patients.The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing colonic SEMS versus emergency surgery (ES) for MCO in palliative patients. This was the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting. Methods A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA method using online databases with no restriction regarding idiom or year of publication. Data were extracted by two authors according to a predefined data extraction form. Primary outcomes were: mean survival, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Stoma formation, length of stay on intensive care unit (ICU), technical success and clinical success were recorded for secondary outcomes. Technical success (TS) was defined as successful stent placement across the stricture and its deployment. Clinical success (CS) was defined as adequate bowel decompression within 48?h of stent insertion without need for re-intervention. Results We analyzed data from four RCT studies totaling 125 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.3?% for SEMS-treated patients and 6.4?% for ES-treated patients, with no difference between groups (RD:?–?0.00, 95?% CI [–0.10, 0.10], I2: 0?%). Mean survival was 279 days for SEMS and 244 days for ES, with no significant difference between groups (RD: 20.14, 95?% CI: [–42.92, 83.21], I2: 44?%). Clinical success was 96?% in the ES group and 86.1?% in the SEMS group (RD:?–?0.13, 95?% CI [–0.23,?–?0.02], I2: 51?%). Permanent stoma rate was 84?% in the ES group and 14.3?% in the SEMS group (RR: 0.19, 95?% CI: [0.11, 0.33], I2: 28?%). Length of hospital stay was shorter in SEMS group (RD:?–?5.16, 95?% CI: [–6.71,?–?3.61], I2: 56?%). There was no significant difference between groups regarding adverse events (RD 0.18, 95?% CI: [–0.19, 0.54;]) neither regarding ICU stay. (RD: – 0.01, 95?% CI: [–0.08, 0.05], I2: 7?%). The most common stent-related complication was perforation (42.8?% of all AE). Conclusion Mortality, mean survival, length of stay in the ICU and early complications of both methods were similar. SEMS may be an alternative to surgery with the advantage of early hospital discharge and lower risk of permanent stoma.
机译:背景和研究目标大肠癌(CRC)是全球第三大最常见的恶性肿瘤和第三大癌症死因。 CRC致恶性结肠梗阻(MCO)的发生率为8%至29%。本研究的目的是对RCT进行系统的回顾和荟萃分析,以比较结肠SEMS与急诊手术(ES)对MCO的影响。姑息患者。这是第一个系统评价,仅包括姑息治疗中的随机对照试验。方法根据PRISMA方法,使用在线数据库进行文献检索,没有关于成语或出版年份的限制。两位作者根据预定义的数据提取表提取了数据。主要结果是:平均生存期,30天不良事件,30天死亡率和住院时间。继发结局记录气孔形成,重症监护病房(ICU)停留时间,技术成功和临床成功。技术上的成功(TS)定义为在狭窄部位及其布置过程中成功放置支架。临床成功(CS)定义为在支架置入后48h内进行充分的肠减压而无需再次干预。结果我们分析了来自四项RCT研究的数据,共125例患者。经SEMS治疗的患者30天死亡率为6.3%,经ES治疗的患者为6.4 %%,两组之间无差异(RD:?–?0.00,95 %% CI [–0.10,0.10],I < sup> 2 :0%)。 SEMS的平均生存期为279天,ES的平均生存期为244天,两组之间无显着差异(RD:20.14,95%CI:[– 42.92,83.21],I 2 :44%) 。 ES组的临床成功率为96%,SEMS组的临床成功率为86.1%(RD:?– 0.13,95%CI [–0.23,?– 0.02],I 2 : 51%)。 ES组的永久造口率为84%,SEMS组的永久造口率为14.3%(RR:0.19,95%CI:[0.11,0.33],I 2 :28%)。 SEMS组的住院时间较短(RD:?–?5.16,95 %% CI:[– 6.71,?–?3.61],I 2 :56%)。两组在不良事件方面均无显着差异(RD 0.18,95%CI:[– 0.19,0.54;]),也没有关于ICU停留的差异。 (RD:-0.01,95%CI:[-0.08,0.05],I 2 :7%)。最常见的支架相关并发症是穿孔(占所有AE的42.8%)。结论两种方法的死亡率,平均生存率,在ICU的住院时间和早期并发症相似。 SEMS可以替代手术,其优点是可以尽早出院并降低永久性造口的风险。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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