Fully covered metal stents vs plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer without neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial

Safety of biliary drainage with 6-mm metallic stent for preoperative obstructive jaundice in pancreatic cancer: PURPLE SIX STUDY

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The 10-mm self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is the standard for endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage before pancreatic cancer surgery. However, the efficacy of stents thinner than 10 mm has not been adequately validated. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the safety of a 6-mm fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) for distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) during preoperative chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This was a single-arm, multicenter, prospective phase II study of endoscopic transpapillary initial biliary drainage for DMBO before pancreatic cancer surgery. The primary endpoint was stent-related adverse events, and the key secondary endpoint was the non-recurrent biliary obstruction (non-RBO) rate during the observation period for both resectable (R) and borderline resectable (BR) pancreatic cancers.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 33 patients, among whom 32 received the study treatment. There were 23 and 9 cases of R and BR pancreatic cancers, respectively. The technical and clinical success rates were 97.0% and 90.1%, respectively. The stent-related adverse event rate was 3.1% (n = 1, acute pancreatitis) (95% confidential interval, 0.00-16.2), which met the criteria to be considered safe. The overall non-RBO rate during the observation period (median 96 days) was 78.1% (82.6% and 66.7% for R and BR pancreatic cancer cases, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The 6-mm FCSEMS is an extremely safe metallic stent with a low stent-related adverse event rate of 3.1% for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer. It is considered the optimal stent for preoperative biliary drainage in terms of the non-RBO rate. UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN-CTR 000041704).

Fully covered self-expandable metallic stents versus plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic head cancer and the risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Objectives

Optimal stents for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for patients with possible resectable pancreatic cancer remain controversial, and risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP), followed by PBD, are unknown. In this study, the efficacy and safety of fully covered self-expandable metallic stents (FCSEMSs) and plastic stents (PSs) were compared, and the risk factors for PEP, followed by PBD, were investigated for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent PBD between April 2005 and March 2022 were included. We retrospectively evaluated recurrent biliary obstruction, adverse events (AEs), and postoperative complications for FCSEMS and PS groups and investigated the risk factors for PEP.

Results

A total of 105 patients were included. There were 20 patients in the FCSEMS group and 85 patients in the PS group. For the FCSEMS group, the rate of recurrent biliary obstruction (0% vs. 25%, p = 0.03) was significantly lower. There was no difference in AE between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in the overall postoperative complications, but the volume of intraoperative bleeding was larger for the PS group than it was for the FCSEMS group (p < 0.001). From multivariate analysis, being female and lack of main pancreatic duct dilation were independent risk factors for pancreatitis (odds ratio, 5.68; p = 0.028; odds ratio, 4.91; p = 0.048).

Conclusions

FCSEMSs are thought to be preferable to PSs for PBD due to their longer time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Being female and the lack of main pancreatic duct dilation were risk factors for PEP.

Fully covered versus partially covered self-expandable metal stents for palliation of distal malignant biliary obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are standardly used for distal malignant biliary obstruction (dMBO). Although data suggest that covered versus uncovered SEMSs increase the time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), no data are available for fully covered (FC) versus partially covered (PC) designs.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were screened up to January 2023 for studies concerning dMBO treated by an FC- or PC-SEMS and describing adverse events (AEs), recurrences, or TRBO for specific design subpopulations. Pooled proportions or means were calculated using a random-effects model. Several subanalyses were preplanned, including a subanalysis restricted to prospective studies and unresectable diseases. Heterogeneity and publication bias were explored. Standardized differences (d-values) were calculated between groups.

RESULTS

From 1290 records, 62 studies (3327 using FC-SEMSs and 2322 using PC-SEMSs) were included. FC- versus PC-SEMSs showed negligible differences in the rate of total AEs (12% vs 9.9%) and all specific AEs, including cholecystitis (2.5% vs 2.6%). In a subanalysis restricted to prospective studies and unresectable diseases, the rate of RBO was comparable between FC-SEMSs (27.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 23.7-31.2], I2 = 35.34%) and PC-SEMSs (25.3% [95% CI, 20.2-30.7], I2 = 85.09%), despite small differences (d-values between .186 and .216) in the rate of ingrowth (.5% vs 2.9%) favoring FC-SEMSs and migration (9.8% vs 4.3%) favoring PC-SEMSs. TRBO was shorter for FC-SEMSs (238 days [95% CI, 191-286], I2 = 63.1%) versus PC-SEMSs (369 days [95% CI, 290-449], I2 = 71.9%; d-value = .116).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite considerable heterogeneity and small standardized differences, PC-SEMSs consistently exhibited longer TRBO than FC-SEMSs across analyses, without any other differences in AE rates, potentially proposing PC-SEMSs as the standard comparator and TRBO as the primary outcome for future randomized studies on dMBO. (Clinical trial registration number: CRD42023393965.).

Comparison Between Plastic and Metallic Biliary Stent Placement for Preoperative Patients with Pancreatic Head Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimal preoperative biliary drainage for patients with pancreatic cancer before pancreatoduodenectomy remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the comparison of efficacy and safety between a metallic stent (MS) and a plastic stent (PS).

METHODS

Comparative studies on the use of MS and PS for pancreatic cancer before pancreatoduodenectomy were systematically searched using the MEDLINE and Web of Science databases. Pre- and postoperative data also were extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to compare post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications as well as intra- and postoperative outcomes between the two arms of the study, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) were calculated with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The study analyzed 12 studies involving 683 patients. Insertion of MS was associated with a lower incidence of re-intervention (OR, 0.06; 95% CI 0.03-0.15; P < 0.001), increased post-ERCP adverse events (OR, 2.22; 95% CI 1.13-4.36; P = 0.02), and similar operation time (MD, 18.0 min; 95% CI -29.1 to 65.6 min; P = 0.46), amount of blood loss (MD, 43.0 ml; 95% CI -207.1 to 288.2 ml; P = 0.73), and surgical complication rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.53-1.15; P = 0.21). The cumulative stent patency rate after 3 months was higher in the MS group than in the PS group (70-100 % vs 30.0-45.0 %).

CONCLUSION

For biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic cancer during this era of multidisciplinary treatment, MS use might be the first choice because MS provides a more durable biliary drainage and a similar risk of postoperative outcomes compared with PS.

Metal vs plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with periampullary cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Metal stents (MS) are recommended for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with periampullary cancer, but whether MS are superior in terms of re-intervention and direct cost is debatable. This study aimed to compare the effects of MS and PS on the outcomes of patients with periampullary cancer.

METHODS

For this random-effects meta-analysis, electronic databases were screened for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until January 2022. Subgroup analyses were performed basis on the center type and presence of NAC.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, seven RCTs (440 participants) were included. MS reduced re-interventions (risk ratio [RR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.25-0.72) and direct costs (mean difference = -474 USD, 95% CI = -656 to -292). PBD-related complications (RR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.32-1.71) and postoperative complications (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.45-1.17) did not differ between MS and PS. Compared PS, MS reduced postoperative complications in high-volume centers (RR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.49-0.84) and PBD-related complications in patients receiving NAC (RR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.08-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Metal stents likely reduces re-interventions and direct costs. Further studies are needed to confirm the effects of MS on the outcomes.