Covered self-expandable metallic stent versus plastic stent for preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic cancer: a multi-center retrospective cohort study

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.