| Literature DB >> 36267306 |
Min Gong1, Qiang Li1, You Xu1, Yunhui Fu1.
Abstract
Objective: Cholangiocarcinoma is a common malignant tumor that occurs in the bile duct system, which can be treated by using the endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP). This study was aimed at exploring the therapeutic effect of ERCP with metal stent and plastic stent for cholangiocarcinoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36267306 PMCID: PMC9578868 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5741437
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Analysis of general information of two groups.
| General information | The plastic stent group ( | The metal stent group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (female/male) | 21/22 | 13/15 | 0.039 | 0.843 |
| Age (year) | 68.34 ± 5.48 | 68.58 ± 5.26 | 0.183 | 0.855 |
| Biliary stricture length (cm) | 3.24 ± 0.87 | 3.22 ± 0.92 | 0.093 | 0.927 |
| Albumin (<35/≥35 g/L) | 15/28 | 9/19 | 0.057 | 0.811 |
| Preoperative GGT (U/mL) | 475.32 ± 29.54 | 476.51 ± 29.63 | 0.166 | 0.869 |
| Total bilirubin (ummol/L) | 0.470 | 0.791 | ||
| ≥427 | 9 (20.93) | 6 (21.43) | ||
| 342-427 | 26 (60.47) | 15 (53.57) | ||
| 205-342 | 8 (18.60) | 7 (25.00) |
Figure 1Process of general data selection.
Comparison of liver function between the two groups ().
| Groups | ALT (U/L) | DBIL ( | AST (U/L) | ALP (U/L) | TBIL ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The plastic stent group ( | Before treatment | 105.24 ± 4.26 | 165.24 ± 12.85 | 67.52 ± 6.58 | 438.52 ± 27.41 | 164.52 ± 12.73 |
| After treatment | 59.65 ± 3.25a | 53.24 ± 3.57a | 34.84 ± 4.28a | 135.41 ± 11.54a | 53.42 ± 2.57a | |
|
| ||||||
| The metal stent group ( | Before treatment | 105.18 ± 4.23 | 165.38 ± 12.87 | 67.54 ± 6.43 | 438.41 ± 27.44 | 163.92 ± 12.84 |
| After treatment | 56.42 ± 3.17ab | 50.37 ± 3.16ab | 30.21 ± 3.16ab | 110.39 ± 11.51ab | 48.46 ± 2.13ab | |
Note: aP < 0.05 compared with the same group before treatment. bP < 0.05 compared with the plastic stent group after treatment.
Comparison of postoperative complications between the two groups (cases, %).
| Groups | The plastic stent group ( | The metal stent group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stent displacement | 6 (13.95) | 1 (3.57) | 2.057 | 0.152 |
| Intraoperative expansion | 4 (9.30) | 1 (3.57) | 0.851 | 0.356 |
| Postoperative pancreatitis | 5 (11.63) | 1 (3.57) | 1.423 | 0.233 |
| Cholangitis | 3 (13.95) | 1 (3.57) | 2.057 | 0.152 |
| No decrease in total bilirubin | 2 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 1.340 | 0.247 |
| Liver abscess | 1 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 0.661 | 0.416 |
| Bleeding | 2 (4.65) | 0 (0.00) | 1.340 | 0.247 |
| Total complication rate | 23 (53.49) | 4 (14.29) | 11.059 | <0.001 |
Comparison of stent implantation success rate between the two groups (cases, %).
| Type | The plastic stent group ( | The metal stent group ( |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Success rate | Cases | Success rate | |||
| Type I | 7 | 6 (85.71) | 5 | 5 (100.00) | 0.197 | 0.657 |
| Type II | 15 | 10 (66.67) | 9 | 9 (100.00) | 0.683 | 0.408 |
| Type III | 11 | 6 (54.55) | 8 | 8 (100.00) | 2.289 | 0.130 |
| Type IV | 10 | 4 (40.00) | 6 | 5 (83.33) | 1.121 | 0.290 |
| Total success rete | 43 | 26 (60.47) | 28 | 27 (96.43) | 11.589 | <0.001 |
Figure 2Comparison of stent implantation success rate between the two groups. (a) The plastic stent group. (b) The metal stent group. The success rates of stent implantation in the metal stent group were higher than that in the plastic stent group (P < 0.05).
Figure 3Comparison of survival time between the two groups.
Univariate analysis of prognostic factors in patients with cholangiocarcinoma.
| Prognostic factors | The poor prognosis group ( | The good prognosis group ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 65.88 ± 10.16 | 67.26 ± 8.90 | |||
|
| |||||
| Gender | Male | 19 (57.58) | 15 (39.47) | 2.319 | 0.128 |
| Female | 14 (42.42) | 23 (60.53) | |||
|
| |||||
| Smoking history | 8 (24.24) | 10 (26.32) | 0.040 | 0.841 | |
|
| |||||
| Drinking history | 6 (18.18) | 9 (23.68) | 1.592 | 0.207 | |
|
| |||||
| Family tumor history | 6 (18.18) | 1 (2.63) | 4.806 | 0.028 | |
|
| |||||
| Tumor diameter | <5 cm | 13 (39.39) | 25 (65.79) | 6.180 | 0.013 |
| ≥5 cm | 20 (60.61) | 13 (34.21) | |||
|
| |||||
| Degree of tumor differentiation | Well differentiated | 7 (21.21) | 3 (7.89) | 6.697 | 0.035 |
| Moderately differentiated | 8 (24.24) | 20 (52.63) | |||
| Poorly differentiated | 18 (54.55) | 15 (39.47) | |||
|
| |||||
| Portal vein infiltration | Yes | 19 (57.58) | 12 (31.58) | 4.853 | 0.028 |
| No | 14 (42.42) | 26 (68.42) | |||
|
| |||||
| Lymph node metastasis | Yes | 25 (75.76) | 15 (39.47) | 9.453 | 0.002 |
| No | 8 (24.24) | 23 (60.53) | |||
|
| |||||
| Classification of hilar cholangiocarcinoma | Type I | 5 (15.15) | 14 (36.84) | 10.702 | 0.013 |
| Type II | 9 (27.27) | 16 (42.11) | |||
| Type III | 12 (36.36) | 6 (15.79) | |||
| Type IV | 7 (21.21) | 2 (5.26) | |||
|
| |||||
| Stent type | Metal stent | 7 (21.21) | 21 (55.26) | 8.574 | 0.003 |
| Plastic stent | 26 (78.79) | 17 (44.74) | |||
Logistic multivariate regression analysis.
| Factors |
| SE | Wald |
| OR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tumor diameter ≥ 5 cm | 0.871 | 0.290 | 9.105 | 0.003 | 2.382 | 1.352~4.129 |
| Portal vein infiltration | 1.496 | 0.302 | 24.355 | 0.0001 | 4.460 | 2.452~8.075 |
| Lymph node metastasis | 1.110 | 0.356 | 10.213 | 0.001 | 3.026 | 1.526~5.972 |
| Classification of hilar cholangiocarcinoma | 1.050 | 0.370 | 8.084 | 0.004 | 2.850 | 1.372~5.852 |
| Metal stent type | -1.861 | 0.692 | 7.238 | 0.007 | 0.155 | 0.040~0.603 |