Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-67202020000100500 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Introduction: Endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones has a high success rate ranging from 85% to 95%. Bile duct stones >15 mm are difficult and frequently require lithotripsy. Peroral cholangioscopy (POC) allows lithotripsy with similar success rates. Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy used in the treatment of difficult to remove bile duct stones vs. conventional therapy. Methods: Search was based in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme. Studies enrolling patients referred for the removal of difficult bile duct stones via POC were considered eligible. Two analyses were carried out separately, one included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and another observational studies. Results: Forty-six studies were selected (3 RTC and 43 observational). In the analysis there was no statistical significant difference between successful endoscopic clearance (RD=-0.02 CI: -0.17, 0.12/I²=0%), mean fluoroscopy time (MD=-0.14 CI -1.60, 1.32/I²=21%) and adverse events rates (RD=-0.06 CI: -0.14, 0.02/I²=0%), by contrast, the mean procedure time favored conventional therapy with statistical significance (MD=27.89 CI: 16.68, 39.10/I²=0%). In observational studies, the successful endoscopic clearance rate was 88.29% (CI95: 86.9%-90.7%), the first session successful endoscopic clearance rate was 72.7 % (CI95: 69.9%-75.3%), the mean procedure time was 47.50±6 min for session and the number of sessions to clear bile duct was 1.5±0.18. The adverse event rate was 8.7% (CI95: 7%-10.9%). Conclusions: For complex common bile duct stones, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy has a success rate that is similar to traditional ERCP techniques in terms of therapeutic success, adverse event rate and means fluoroscopy time. Conventional ERCP methods have a shorter mean procedure time. |
id |
CBCD-1_ecad811f7ecd7f88726304902b69523c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0102-67202020000100500 |
network_acronym_str |
CBCD-1 |
network_name_str |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysisEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyERCPLithotripsyCholedocholithiasisSystematic reviewMeta-analysisABSTRACT Introduction: Endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones has a high success rate ranging from 85% to 95%. Bile duct stones >15 mm are difficult and frequently require lithotripsy. Peroral cholangioscopy (POC) allows lithotripsy with similar success rates. Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy used in the treatment of difficult to remove bile duct stones vs. conventional therapy. Methods: Search was based in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme. Studies enrolling patients referred for the removal of difficult bile duct stones via POC were considered eligible. Two analyses were carried out separately, one included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and another observational studies. Results: Forty-six studies were selected (3 RTC and 43 observational). In the analysis there was no statistical significant difference between successful endoscopic clearance (RD=-0.02 CI: -0.17, 0.12/I²=0%), mean fluoroscopy time (MD=-0.14 CI -1.60, 1.32/I²=21%) and adverse events rates (RD=-0.06 CI: -0.14, 0.02/I²=0%), by contrast, the mean procedure time favored conventional therapy with statistical significance (MD=27.89 CI: 16.68, 39.10/I²=0%). In observational studies, the successful endoscopic clearance rate was 88.29% (CI95: 86.9%-90.7%), the first session successful endoscopic clearance rate was 72.7 % (CI95: 69.9%-75.3%), the mean procedure time was 47.50±6 min for session and the number of sessions to clear bile duct was 1.5±0.18. The adverse event rate was 8.7% (CI95: 7%-10.9%). Conclusions: For complex common bile duct stones, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy has a success rate that is similar to traditional ERCP techniques in terms of therapeutic success, adverse event rate and means fluoroscopy time. Conventional ERCP methods have a shorter mean procedure time.Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva2020-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-67202020000100500ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) v.33 n.1 2020reponame:ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)instname:Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva (CBCD)instacron:CBCD10.1590/0102-672020190001e1491info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGALETTI,FacundoMOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux deRIBEIRO,Igor BragaFUNARI,Mateus PereiraCORONEL,MartinSACHDE,Amit H.BRUNALDI,Vitor OttoboniFRANZINI,Tomazo PrinceBERNARDO,Wanderley MarquesMOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux deeng2020-06-22T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-67202020000100500Revistahttp://abarriguda.org.br/revista/index.php/revistaabarrigudaarepb/indexONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistaabcd@gmail.com2317-63262317-6326opendoar:2020-06-22T00:00ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) - Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva (CBCD)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
spellingShingle |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis GALETTI,Facundo Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography ERCP Lithotripsy Choledocholithiasis Systematic review Meta-analysis |
title_short |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort |
Cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. conventional therapy for complex bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
author |
GALETTI,Facundo |
author_facet |
GALETTI,Facundo MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de RIBEIRO,Igor Braga FUNARI,Mateus Pereira CORONEL,Martin SACHDE,Amit H. BRUNALDI,Vitor Ottoboni FRANZINI,Tomazo Prince BERNARDO,Wanderley Marques MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de RIBEIRO,Igor Braga FUNARI,Mateus Pereira CORONEL,Martin SACHDE,Amit H. BRUNALDI,Vitor Ottoboni FRANZINI,Tomazo Prince BERNARDO,Wanderley Marques MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
GALETTI,Facundo MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de RIBEIRO,Igor Braga FUNARI,Mateus Pereira CORONEL,Martin SACHDE,Amit H. BRUNALDI,Vitor Ottoboni FRANZINI,Tomazo Prince BERNARDO,Wanderley Marques MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography ERCP Lithotripsy Choledocholithiasis Systematic review Meta-analysis |
topic |
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography ERCP Lithotripsy Choledocholithiasis Systematic review Meta-analysis |
description |
ABSTRACT Introduction: Endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones has a high success rate ranging from 85% to 95%. Bile duct stones >15 mm are difficult and frequently require lithotripsy. Peroral cholangioscopy (POC) allows lithotripsy with similar success rates. Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy used in the treatment of difficult to remove bile duct stones vs. conventional therapy. Methods: Search was based in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Lilacs/Bireme. Studies enrolling patients referred for the removal of difficult bile duct stones via POC were considered eligible. Two analyses were carried out separately, one included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and another observational studies. Results: Forty-six studies were selected (3 RTC and 43 observational). In the analysis there was no statistical significant difference between successful endoscopic clearance (RD=-0.02 CI: -0.17, 0.12/I²=0%), mean fluoroscopy time (MD=-0.14 CI -1.60, 1.32/I²=21%) and adverse events rates (RD=-0.06 CI: -0.14, 0.02/I²=0%), by contrast, the mean procedure time favored conventional therapy with statistical significance (MD=27.89 CI: 16.68, 39.10/I²=0%). In observational studies, the successful endoscopic clearance rate was 88.29% (CI95: 86.9%-90.7%), the first session successful endoscopic clearance rate was 72.7 % (CI95: 69.9%-75.3%), the mean procedure time was 47.50±6 min for session and the number of sessions to clear bile duct was 1.5±0.18. The adverse event rate was 8.7% (CI95: 7%-10.9%). Conclusions: For complex common bile duct stones, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy has a success rate that is similar to traditional ERCP techniques in terms of therapeutic success, adverse event rate and means fluoroscopy time. Conventional ERCP methods have a shorter mean procedure time. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-67202020000100500 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-67202020000100500 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0102-672020190001e1491 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) v.33 n.1 2020 reponame:ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) instname:Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva (CBCD) instacron:CBCD |
instname_str |
Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva (CBCD) |
instacron_str |
CBCD |
institution |
CBCD |
reponame_str |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) |
collection |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo) - Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva (CBCD) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||revistaabcd@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1754208958776606720 |