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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |