Cargando…

A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous

BACKGROUND: The use of fully covered metal stents (FCSEMS) and specifically designed lumen apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has become widespread. A systematic review published in 2015 did not support the routine use of metal stents for drainage of pancre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Saunders, Rebecca, Ramesh, Jayapal, Cicconi, Silvia, Evans, Jonathan, Yip, Vincent S., Raraty, Michael, Ghaneh, Paula, Sutton, Robert, Neoptolemos, John P., Halloran, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6484810/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30191310
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5
_version_ 1783414175373983744
author Saunders, Rebecca
Ramesh, Jayapal
Cicconi, Silvia
Evans, Jonathan
Yip, Vincent S.
Raraty, Michael
Ghaneh, Paula
Sutton, Robert
Neoptolemos, John P.
Halloran, Christopher
author_facet Saunders, Rebecca
Ramesh, Jayapal
Cicconi, Silvia
Evans, Jonathan
Yip, Vincent S.
Raraty, Michael
Ghaneh, Paula
Sutton, Robert
Neoptolemos, John P.
Halloran, Christopher
author_sort Saunders, Rebecca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of fully covered metal stents (FCSEMS) and specifically designed lumen apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has become widespread. A systematic review published in 2015 did not support the routine use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. However, recent studies have shown conflicting data; therefore a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. METHOD: We conducted a database search for original comparative studies between plastic and metal stents. The random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Outcomes analysed were clinical success, adverse events and requirement of further intervention. RESULTS: The search identified 936 studies, 7 studies with 681 (340 metal, 341 plastic) patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Clinical success was achieved in 93.8% versus 86.2% in the metal and plastic groups, respectively, RR 1.08 [95% CI 1.02–1.14]; p = 0.009. Adverse events were reduced for metal stents when compared with plastic (10.2% vs. 25.0%), RR 0.42 [95% CI 0.22–0.81]; p = 0.010. Metal stent usage reduced bleeding (2.8% vs. 7.9%), RR 0.37; [95% CI 0.18–0.75]; p = 0.006. Further intervention was required in 12.4% of patients in the metal stent group versus 26.7% for plastic stents, RR 0.54; [95% CI 0.22–1.29]; p = 0.165. CONCLUSIONS: The use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections is associated with improved clinical success, fewer adverse events and reduced bleeding compared to plastic stents. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6484810
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64848102019-05-15 A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous Saunders, Rebecca Ramesh, Jayapal Cicconi, Silvia Evans, Jonathan Yip, Vincent S. Raraty, Michael Ghaneh, Paula Sutton, Robert Neoptolemos, John P. Halloran, Christopher Surg Endosc Article BACKGROUND: The use of fully covered metal stents (FCSEMS) and specifically designed lumen apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has become widespread. A systematic review published in 2015 did not support the routine use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. However, recent studies have shown conflicting data; therefore a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. METHOD: We conducted a database search for original comparative studies between plastic and metal stents. The random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Outcomes analysed were clinical success, adverse events and requirement of further intervention. RESULTS: The search identified 936 studies, 7 studies with 681 (340 metal, 341 plastic) patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Clinical success was achieved in 93.8% versus 86.2% in the metal and plastic groups, respectively, RR 1.08 [95% CI 1.02–1.14]; p = 0.009. Adverse events were reduced for metal stents when compared with plastic (10.2% vs. 25.0%), RR 0.42 [95% CI 0.22–0.81]; p = 0.010. Metal stent usage reduced bleeding (2.8% vs. 7.9%), RR 0.37; [95% CI 0.18–0.75]; p = 0.006. Further intervention was required in 12.4% of patients in the metal stent group versus 26.7% for plastic stents, RR 0.54; [95% CI 0.22–1.29]; p = 0.165. CONCLUSIONS: The use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections is associated with improved clinical success, fewer adverse events and reduced bleeding compared to plastic stents. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2018-09-06 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6484810/ /pubmed/30191310 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Saunders, Rebecca
Ramesh, Jayapal
Cicconi, Silvia
Evans, Jonathan
Yip, Vincent S.
Raraty, Michael
Ghaneh, Paula
Sutton, Robert
Neoptolemos, John P.
Halloran, Christopher
A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title_full A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title_short A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6484810/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30191310
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5
work_keys_str_mv AT saundersrebecca asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT rameshjayapal asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT cicconisilvia asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT evansjonathan asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT yipvincents asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT raratymichael asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT ghanehpaula asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT suttonrobert asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT neoptolemosjohnp asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT halloranchristopher asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT saundersrebecca systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT rameshjayapal systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT cicconisilvia systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT evansjonathan systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT yipvincents systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT raratymichael systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT ghanehpaula systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT suttonrobert systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT neoptolemosjohnp systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous
AT halloranchristopher systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofmetalversusplasticstentsfordrainageofpancreaticfluidcollectionsmetalstentsareadvantageous