Literature DB >> 27199157

Lumen-apposing metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: When and for whom?

Ji Young Bang1, Muhammad K Hasan2, Udayakumar Navaneethan2, Bryce Sutton2, Wesam Frandah2, Sameer Siddique2, Robert H Hawes2, Shyam Varadarajulu2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are increasingly being used for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC), their advantage over plastic stents is unclear.
METHODS: In this retrospective case-control study, 20 patients who underwent PFC drainage using LAMS were matched with 40 patients treated with plastic stents according to PFC type (walled-off necrosis [WON] vs pseudocyst) and procedural technique (conventional vs multi-gate). Main outcome measures were treatment success, reintervention, clinical and stent-related adverse events, procedural duration, length of hospital stay (LOS) and hospital costs.
RESULTS: At median follow up of 570 days, except for median procedural duration (8.5 vs 25 min, P < 0.001), there was no significant difference in treatment success (95.0 vs 92.5%, P = 0.99), reintervention (25.0 vs 30.0 %, P = 0.77), clinical (10.0 vs 12.5 %, P = 0.99) and stent-related adverse events (10.0 vs 2.5 %, P = 0.26) or median LOS (2 [IQR 1-5] vs 2 [IQR 1-7] days, P = 0.58) between patients treated with LAMS versus plastic stents. Although there was no difference for WON ($16 708 for LAMS vs $17 221 for plastic stents, P = 0.90), mean hospital costs were significantly lower for pseudocysts using plastic stents ($18 996 vs $58 649, P = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no difference in clinical outcomes, treating pseudocysts using plastic stents is less expensive. It is also possible that the short procedural duration is a surrogate marker for procedural complexity and this may drive the use of LAMS in sicker patients.
© 2016 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  endoscopic ultrasound; lumen-apposing metal stent; pancreatic fluid collection; plastic stent; walled-off necrosis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27199157     DOI: 10.1111/den.12681

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Endosc        ISSN: 0915-5635            Impact factor:   7.559


  34 in total

1.  The safety and efficacy of a new 20-mm lumen apposing metal stent (lams) for the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections: a large international, multicenter study.

Authors:  Andrea Anderloni; Carlo Fabbri; Jose Nieto; Will Uwe; Markus Dollhopf; José Ramón Aparicio; Manuel Perez-Miranda; Ilaria Tarantino; Alexander Arlt; Frank Vleggaar; Geoffrey Vanbiervliet; Jochen Hampe; Michel Kahaleh; Juan J Vila; Barham K Abu Dayyeh; Andrew C Storm; Alessandro Fugazza; Cecilia Binda; Antoine Charachon; Sergio Sevilla-Ribota; Amy Tyberg; Moran Robert; Sachin Wani; Alessandro Repici; Amrita Sethi; Mouen A Khashab; Rastislav Kunda
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Endoscopic transmural management of abdominal fluid collection following gastrointestinal, bariatric, and hepato-bilio-pancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Gianfranco Donatelli; David Fuks; Fabrizio Cereatti; Guillaume Pourcher; Thierry Perniceni; Jean-Loup Dumont; Thierry Tuszynski; Bertrand Marie Vergeau; Bruno Meduri; Brice Gayet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Efficacy and safety of metallic stents in comparison to plastic stents for endoscopic drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Authors:  Rajesh Panwar; Preet Mohinder Singh
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-07-18

Review 4.  Efficacy and Safety of Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents in Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Are They Better Than Plastic Stents? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tariq Hammad; Muhammad Ali Khan; Yaseen Alastal; Wade Lee; Ali Nawras; Mohammad Kashif Ismail; Michel Kahaleh
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  Candidemia after endoscopic therapy with lumen-apposing metal stent for pancreatic walled-off necrosis.

Authors:  Tajana Pavic; Davor Hrabar; Dominik Kralj; Ivan Lerotic; Doris Ogresta
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-01-30

6.  Multivariate analysis of the factors affecting the prognosis of walled-off pancreatic necrosis after endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage.

Authors:  Jintao Guo; Bowen Duan; Siyu Sun; Sheng Wang; Xiang Liu; Nan Ge; Wen Liu; Shupeng Wang; Jinlong Hu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Endoscopic Ultrasound and Related Technologies for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pancreatic Disease - Research Gaps and Opportunities: Summary of a National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Workshop.

Authors:  Linda S Lee; Dana K Andersen; Reiko Ashida; William R Brugge; Mimi I Canto; Kenneth J Chang; Suresh T Chari; John DeWitt; Joo Ha Hwang; Mouen A Khashab; Kang Kim; Michael J Levy; Kevin McGrath; Walter G Park; Aatur Singhi; Tyler Stevens; Christopher C Thompson; Mark D Topazian; Michael B Wallace; Sachin Wani; Irving Waxman; Dhiraj Yadav; Vikesh K Singh
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.327

8.  [Retrieval of a migrated plastic stent in a 51-year-old man].

Authors:  A Poszler; P Klare; A Weber; M Abdelhafez; K Holzapfel; R M Schmid; S von Delius
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 0.743

9.  Validation of the Orlando Protocol for endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collections in the era of lumen-apposing metal stents.

Authors:  Ji Young Bang; C Mel Wilcox; Juan Pablo Arnoletti; Shajan Peter; John Christein; Udayakumar Navaneethan; Robert Hawes; Shyam Varadarajulu
Journal:  Dig Endosc       Date:  2021-09-06       Impact factor: 6.337

10.  Metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collection: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Seung Bae Yoon; In Seok Lee; Myung-Gyu Choi
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 4.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.