Comparative Studies for Endoscopic SIS vs SBS Deployment for Hilar Biliary Obstrucion
Author | Design | Stent | Sex (male) |
Mean age (SD) |
Technical success | Clinical success | Early adverse events | Late adverse events | Total adverse events | Occlusion rate | Stent patency (day) |
Survival (day) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Naitoh et al20 | Retrospective | SIS, 24 | 14 | 74.6 (8.3) |
100 (24) |
100 (24/24) |
4.2 (1/24) |
8.3 (2/24) |
12.5 (3/24) |
41.7 (10/24) | 104 | 159 |
SBS, 28 | 11 | 69.5 (11) |
89.3 (25) |
96.0 (24/25) | 10.7 (3/28) |
32.0 (8/25) |
44.0 (11/25) |
20.0 (5/25) |
155 | 198 | ||
0.137 | 0.105 | 0.148 | 0.51 | 0.366 | 0.074 | 0.016 | 0.091 | 0.388 | 0.952 | |||
Kim et al59 | Retrospective | SIS, 22 | 17 | 65.0 (3.1) |
100 (22) |
81.8 (18) |
22.7 (5/22) |
50.0 (11/22) | 72.7 (16/22) | 59.1 (13/22) | 134 | 225 |
SBS, 19 | 11 | 64.2 (2.8) |
100 (19) |
78.9 (15) |
31.6 (6/19) |
36.8 (7/19) |
68.4 (13/19) | 47.4 (9/19) |
118 | 146 | ||
0.313 | 0.637 | NS | 1 | 0.725 | 0.531 | N/A | 0.538 | 0.074 | 0.266 | |||
Law and Baron61 | Retrospective | SIS, 7 | Total | 68 | 100 (7) |
Total | Total | 42.9 (3/7) |
Total | |||
SBS, 17 | 19 | 68 | 100 (17) |
N/A | 4/0 | 4/0 | 52.9 (9/17) |
86 | N/A | |||
0.99 | NS | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.31 | N/A | N/A | ||||
Lee et al60 | RCT | SIS, 34 | 15 | 74.5 (10.04) |
100 (34) |
94.1 (32/34) | 11.8 (4/34) |
17.6 (6/34) |
23.5 (8/34) |
44.1 (15/34) | 253 | 209 |
SBS, 35 | 21 | 72.5 (11.05) |
91.4 (32) |
90.6 (29/32) | 11.4 (4/35) |
22.9 (8/35) |
28.6 (10/35) | 34.3 (12/35) | 262 | 221 | ||
0.187 | 0.438 | 0.081 | 0.668 | 0.965 | 0.591 | 0.633 | 0.403 | 0.865 | 0.197 |
Values are presented as number only, percentage (number), or median.
SIS, stent-in-stent; SBS, stent-by-stent; SD, standard deviation; NS, not significant; N/A, not available; RCT, randomized controlled trial.