Cost analysis of a long-term randomized controlled study in biliary duct-to-duct anastomotic stricture after liver transplantation

Fully covered self-expandable metal stents versus multiple plastic stents for the treatment of post-orthotopic liver transplant anastomotic biliary strictures: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The most common adverse event (AE) of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is anastomotic biliary stricture (ABS). Management varies widely between centers, and it is not clear whether a combination of endoscopic dilation of the stenosis followed by multiple plastic stents (MPS) or placement of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (fcSEMS) is better for the management of post-OLT ABS. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost of fcSEMS versus MPS in the treatment of post-OLT ABS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fcSEMS with MPS for the treatment of patients with post-OLT ABS and reporting at least one of the outcomes of interest. The pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model, and I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The study included 5 RCTs (245 patients). There was no statistically significant difference between fcSEMS and MPS in stricture resolution (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.11; p = 0.86), stricture recurrence (RR 2.22; 95% CI 0.73 to 6.75; p = 0.16), treatment cost (MD - 5.31 thousand dollars 95% CI -12.76 to 2.13; p = 0.16), and AEs (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.27 to 2.83; p = 0.82). However, fcSEMS reduced the number of ERCP sessions (MD - 1.7 sessions; CI 95% - 2.9 to - 0.5; p = 0.005) and treatment duration (MD-95.7 days; 95% CI -184.5 to -6.9; p = 0.03) compared with MPS.

CONCLUSION

fcSEMS and MPS had similar efficacy and safety in patients with ABS post-OLT. However, fcSEMS was associated with fewer ERCP sessions and shorter treatment duration.

Endoscopic management of benign biliary strictures: Looking for the best stent to place

Benign biliary strictures (BBS) might occur due to different pancreaticobiliary conditions. The etiology and location of biliary strictures are responsible of a wide array of clinical manifestations. The endoscopic approach endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography represents the first-line treatment for BBS, considering interventional radiology and surgery when endoscopic treatment fails or it is not suitable. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of possible endoscopic treatments for the optimal management of this subset of patients.

Antimigration versus conventional fully covered metal stents in the endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures after deceased-donor liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Migration of fully covered metal stents (FCMS) remains a limitation of the endoscopic treatment of anastomotic biliary strictures (ABS) following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The use of antimigration FCMS (A-FCMS) might enhance endoscopic treatment outcomes for ABS.

METHODS

Single center retrospective study. Consecutive patients with ABS following OLT who underwent ERCP with FCMS placement between January 2005 and December 2020 were eligible. Subjects were grouped into conventional-FCMS (C-FCMS) and A-FCMS. The primary outcome was stent migration rates. Secondary outcomes were stricture resolution, adverse event, and recurrence rates.

RESULTS

A total of 102 (40 C-FCMS; 62 A-FCMS) patients were included. Stent migration was identified at the first revision in 24 C-FCMS patients (63.2%) and in 21 A-FCMS patients (36.2%) (p = 0.01). The overall migration rate, including the first and subsequent endoscopic revisions, was 65.8% in C-FCMS and 37.3% in A-FCMS (p = 0.006). The stricture resolution rate at the first endoscopic revision was similar in both groups (60.0 vs 61.3%, p = 0.87). Final stricture resolution was achieved in 95 patients (93.1%), with no difference across groups (92.5 vs 93.5%; p = 0.84). Adverse events were identified in 13 patients (12.1%) with no difference across groups. At a median follow-up of 52 (IQR: 19-85.5) months after stricture resolution, 25 patients (24.5%) developed recurrences, with no difference across groups (C-FCMS 30% vs A-FCMS 21%; p = 0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of A-FCMS during ERCP for ABS following OLT results in significantly lower stent migration rates compared to C-FCMS. However, the clinical benefit of reduced stent migration is unclear. Larger studies focusing on stricture resolution and recurrence rates are needed.

Intraductal fully covered self-expandable metal stent versus multiple plastic stents for treating biliary anastomotic strictures after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fully covered metal stents (FCSEMSs) are increasingly used for treatment of biliary anastomotic strictures (ASs) after liver transplantation (LT), requiring fewer endoscopic interventions than does treatment with multiple plastic stents (MPSs). Previous studies, however, have reported adverse events such as stent migration and pancreatitis. The intraductal FCSEMS (ID-FCSEMS) potentially avoids these disadvantages. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ID-FCSEMSs compared with MPSs for AS.

METHODS

The cohorts of LT patients treated for AS with endoscopic stenting between 2010 and 2019 from 2 Dutch liver transplantation centers were retrospectively analyzed. Patients treated with ID-FCSEMSs or MPSs were included.

RESULTS

80 patients (44 with ID-FCSEMSs vs 36 with MPSs) were included, with a median follow-up time of 52 versus 64 months (P = .183). Stricture resolution was 93% in the ID-FCSEMS versus 97% in the MPS group (P = 1.000) after a median of 19 and 26 weeks, respectively (P = .031). The median number of ERCPs was 2 in the ID-FCSEMS group versus 4 in the MPS group (P < .001). Stricture recurrence occurred in 33% of ID-FCSEMS versus 29% of MPS patients (P = .653) after a median of 24 and 55 weeks (P = .403). Stent migration occurred in 16% of ID-FCSEMS versus 39% of MPS patients (P = .020). Post-ERCP fever was observed in 34% of ID-FCSEMS patients compared with 14% of MPS patients (P = .038). No significant differences were found in pancreatitis rate between the groups, being 6.8% for ID-FCSEMSs and 5.6% for MPSs (P = .816).

CONCLUSION

ID-FCSEMSs for the treatment of AS after LT provides similar stricture resolution and recurrence rates as MPSs, though with a significant reduction of procedures needed.

Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurs more frequently in self-expandable metallic stents than multiple plastic stents on benign biliary strictures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The occurrence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) after using covered self-expandable metallic stents (CSEMS) and multiple plastic stents (MPS) in the therapy of benign biliary strictures (BBS) remains ambiguous, this analysis aimed to evaluate the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with MPS, CSEMS caused a significantly higher incidence of PEP but fewer ERCP procedures, while the rate of stricture resolution, recurrence, and overall adverse events were comparable. Prevention methods of PEP should be further evaluated in BBS when undergoing CSEMS placement.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the included studies were published between 2008 and 2021. The primary outcome was PEP, while the secondary outcomes were stricture resolution, recurrence, overall adverse events, costs, and ERCP sessions. Pooled effect sizes were calculated with the random-effects model or fixed-effects model depending on the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Six RCTs contained 444 patients (221 with CSEMS, 223 with MPS) finally included in the meta-analysis. The present analysis shows that compared to MPS, PEP is more likely to occur in CSEMS (OR [odds ratio] = 3.34, 95% confidence intervals [CI]:1.44-7.77, p = .005). CSEMS needs fewer ERCP sessions (Mean Deviation [MD]: -1.56; 95%CI:-2.66, -0.46], p = .006). The difference in stricture resolution and recurrence was not significant between the two stent types (OR = 0.87, 95%CI: 0.49-1.56, p = .64; and OR = 2.3, 95%CI: 0.68-7.76, p = .18). The incidence of overall adverse events was comparable between CSEMS and the MPS group (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.97-2.29, p = .07).

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022314864. Key messagesCSEMS and MPS placement remain a mainstay for patients with BBS, and severe complications after stent placement have not been compared.The incidence of PEP was higher after deployment of CSEMS compared to MPS.Prevention methods of PEP should be evaluated in BBS when undergoing CSEMS placement.

Metal versus plastic stents in the management of benign biliary strictures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Benign biliary strictures (BBS) are usually treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of multiple plastic stents (MPS) or a covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS). In this meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy and safety of MPS and CSEMS in the management of BBS. We reviewed several databases from inception to 28 April 2021 to identify RCTs that compared MPS with CSEMS in the management of BBS. Our outcomes of interest were stricture resolution, stricture recurrence, adverse events, stent migration and mean number of ERCPs to achieve stricture resolution. Data were analyzed using a random-effects model. We included eight RCTs with 524 patients. We found no significant difference in the rate of stricture resolution (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.10), stricture recurrence (risk ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 0.72-3.88) or adverse events (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.73-1.87) between groups. Mean number of ERCPs was significantly lower in the CSEMS group (SMD, -1.99; 95% CI, -3.35 to -0.64). The rate of stent migration was significantly higher in the CSEMS group. CSEMS are comparable in efficacy and safety to MPS in the management of BBS but require fewer ERCPs to achieve stricture resolution.

Covered Self-Expanding Metal Stents Versus Multiple Plastic Stents for Benign Biliary Strictures: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Optimal endoscopic management of benign biliary strictures (BBS) has been a matter of debate with choice of stent remaining largely at the discretion of the endoscopist. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared self-expanding metal stents with multiple plastic stents for benign biliary strictures. A comprehensive search of literature from 2000 till September 2021 was done of various databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating stent placement for benign biliary strictures. Our primary aim was to compare outcomes of endoscopic therapy for BBS using covered self-expandable metal stents (cSEMS) and multiple plastic stents (MPS) in terms of stricture resolution, number of ERCP sessions, recurrence of stricture, stent migration, and moderate-severe adverse events. Eight randomized controlled trials (534 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. cSEMS were comparable to MPS for stricture resolution (risk ratio {RR}: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.89-1.08, p=1.00), recurrence of stricture (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.35-1.53, p=0.13), stent migration (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.54-1.52, p=0.26), and moderate-severe adverse events (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.67-1.61, p=0.19) with low to moderate heterogeneity among studies. cSEMS required fewer sessions of ERCP for stricture resolution (mean difference: 1.88, 95% CI: 0.91-2.85, p<0.00001) but with significant heterogeneity among studies. No difference in stricture resolution was seen in subgroup analysis between anastomotic strictures, chronic pancreatitis, or bile duct injury. cSEMS are comparable to MPS in patients with benign biliary strictures in terms of stricture resolution, recurrence, and adverse effects, needing fewer sessions of ERCP. Larger studies comparing cost-effectiveness of cSEMS and MPS in BBS are needed.