...
首页> 外文期刊>Transplant international : >Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary stricture after adult deceased donor liver transplantation with multiple plastic stents versus self‐expandable metal stents: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
【24h】

Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary stricture after adult deceased donor liver transplantation with multiple plastic stents versus self‐expandable metal stents: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

机译:成人死亡供体肝移植多种塑料支架与自膨胀金属支架的内镜治疗吻合体腹膜术:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Summary Anastomotic biliary strictures ( ABS s) occur in up to 15% of patients after liver transplantation ( LT ). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of self‐expandable metal stents ( SEMS ) versus multiple plastic stents ( MPS ). Databases were searched through April 2017. The outcome measures were technical success, stricture resolution, recurrence and complications. We synthesized the findings descriptively and performed a meta‐analysis. Three randomized controlled trials and one retrospective cohort study were identified, including 179 MPS and 119 SEMS patients. Outcome data were pooled in a meta‐analysis that showed an advantage of SEMS in terms of the number of ERCP procedures (mean difference: 1.69 ERCP ; 95% CI , 1–2.39; P 0.00001) and treatment days (mean difference: 40.2 days; 95% CI , 3.9–76.4; P = 0.03), with no differences in terms of ABS resolution or recurrence. Fourteen case series reported MPS outcomes and fifteen reported SEMS outcomes, including 647 and 419 patients, respectively. Based on low‐quality evidence, we cannot draw any reliable conclusions on the superiority of MPS or SEMS strategies. Even though shorter treatment times and fewer ERCP procedures support the use of SEMS , whether one technique has well‐defined advantages over the other remains unclear.
机译:发明内容肝移植(LT)后,吻合胆量抗伤症狭窄(ABS)患者可达15%的患者。本研究的目的是比较自膨胀金属支架(SEM)与多个塑料支架(MPS)的疗效和安全性。通过2017年4月搜索数据库。结果措施是技术成功,狭窄决议,复发和并发症。我们描述了描述了调查结果并进行了荟萃分析。鉴定了三项随机对照试验和一项回顾性队列研究,包括179国会MPS和119例SEMS患者。在META分析中汇集了结果数据,其在ERCP程序的数量方面显示了SEM的优势(平均差异:1.69ERCP; 95%CI,1-2.39; P <0.00001)和治疗天(平均差异: 40.2天; 95%CI,3.9-76.4; p = 0.03),效率分辨率或复发方面没有差异。十四个案例系列报告了MPS结果和十五次报告的SEMS结果,其中包括647和419名患者。基于低质量证据,我们无法对MPS或SEMS战略的优越性绘制任何可靠的结论。尽管较短的治疗时间和更少的ERCP程序支持使用SEM,但是一种技术是否具有明确定义的优势,另一个技术仍然不清楚。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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