Cargando…

Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study

To compare patency between suspended over length biliary stents (SOBSs; made from nasobiliary tube) and conventional plastic biliary stents (CPBSs). We retrospectively analyzed 61 patients with extrahepatic biliary stricture who underwent SOBS placement (intrahepatic bile duct) and 74 patients who u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yan, Xiue, Huang, Yonghui, Chang, Hong, Zhang, Yaopeng, Yao, Wei, Li, Ke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6392648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30461643
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013312
_version_ 1783398519981211648
author Yan, Xiue
Huang, Yonghui
Chang, Hong
Zhang, Yaopeng
Yao, Wei
Li, Ke
author_facet Yan, Xiue
Huang, Yonghui
Chang, Hong
Zhang, Yaopeng
Yao, Wei
Li, Ke
author_sort Yan, Xiue
collection PubMed
description To compare patency between suspended over length biliary stents (SOBSs; made from nasobiliary tube) and conventional plastic biliary stents (CPBSs). We retrospectively analyzed 61 patients with extrahepatic biliary stricture who underwent SOBS placement (intrahepatic bile duct) and 74 patients who underwent CPBS placement. Stent patency and complications were compared. The SOBS group was slightly older and contained more females than the CPBS group but other baseline characteristics were similar. Malignant biliary obstruction accounted for 57.4% (SOBS group) and 45.9% (CPBS group) of cases. Technical success rate, hospital stay and post-procedure complications were similar between groups. Median patency in the CPBS and SOBS group was 116 (2–360) days and 175 (3–480) days, respectively (P <.001). The SOBS group had lower stent occlusion rates than the CPBS group at 3 months (9.8% vs 36.5%), 4 months (22.0% vs 55.4%), 5 months (35.6% vs 67.6%), and 6 months (39.3% vs 77.0%) (all P <.01). In Cox regression analysis, stent type (SOBS vs CPBS) was the only factor associated with patency (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.449; 95% CI: 1.973-6.028; P <.001). SOBS may have better medium-term patency than CPBS for benign/malignant biliary stricture.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6392648
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63926482019-03-15 Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study Yan, Xiue Huang, Yonghui Chang, Hong Zhang, Yaopeng Yao, Wei Li, Ke Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article To compare patency between suspended over length biliary stents (SOBSs; made from nasobiliary tube) and conventional plastic biliary stents (CPBSs). We retrospectively analyzed 61 patients with extrahepatic biliary stricture who underwent SOBS placement (intrahepatic bile duct) and 74 patients who underwent CPBS placement. Stent patency and complications were compared. The SOBS group was slightly older and contained more females than the CPBS group but other baseline characteristics were similar. Malignant biliary obstruction accounted for 57.4% (SOBS group) and 45.9% (CPBS group) of cases. Technical success rate, hospital stay and post-procedure complications were similar between groups. Median patency in the CPBS and SOBS group was 116 (2–360) days and 175 (3–480) days, respectively (P <.001). The SOBS group had lower stent occlusion rates than the CPBS group at 3 months (9.8% vs 36.5%), 4 months (22.0% vs 55.4%), 5 months (35.6% vs 67.6%), and 6 months (39.3% vs 77.0%) (all P <.01). In Cox regression analysis, stent type (SOBS vs CPBS) was the only factor associated with patency (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.449; 95% CI: 1.973-6.028; P <.001). SOBS may have better medium-term patency than CPBS for benign/malignant biliary stricture. Wolters Kluwer Health 2018-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6392648/ /pubmed/30461643 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013312 Text en Copyright © 2018 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
spellingShingle Research Article
Yan, Xiue
Huang, Yonghui
Chang, Hong
Zhang, Yaopeng
Yao, Wei
Li, Ke
Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title_full Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title_fullStr Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title_full_unstemmed Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title_short Suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: A retrospective single-center study
title_sort suspended over length biliary stents versus conventional plastic biliary stents for the treatment of biliary stricture: a retrospective single-center study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6392648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30461643
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013312
work_keys_str_mv AT yanxiue suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy
AT huangyonghui suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy
AT changhong suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy
AT zhangyaopeng suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy
AT yaowei suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy
AT like suspendedoverlengthbiliarystentsversusconventionalplasticbiliarystentsforthetreatmentofbiliarystricturearetrospectivesinglecenterstudy