Primary drainage of distal malignant biliary obstruction: A comparative network meta-analysis

Gaetano Lauri,Livia Archibugi,Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono,Alessandro Repici,Cesare Hassan,Gabriele Capurso,Antonio Facciorusso
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2024.08.053
IF: 5.165
2024-09-15
Digestive and Liver Disease
Abstract:Background The effectiveness of various primary upfront drainage techniques for distal malignant biliary obstructions (dMBO) is not well-established. Objective To compare the technical and clinical success rates and adverse event (AE) rates of various primary drainage techniques. Methods We systematically reviewed RCTs comparing the technical and clinical success and AE rates of EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) with lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS), EUS-CDS with self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (HGS), ERCP, and PTBD performed upfront. Results Six RCTs involving 583 patients were analyzed. EUS-CDS with LAMS showed significantly higher technical success compared to EUS-CDS with SEMS (RR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.07–1.37) and ERCP (RR 1.17, 95 % CI 1.07–1.28). EUS-CDS with LAMS had the highest rank in technical success (SUCRA = 0.86). The clinical success rate was also higher with EUS-CDS with LAMS than with ERCP (RR 1.12, 1.01–1.25). PTBD was the worst ranked procedure for safety (SUCRA score = 0.18), while EUS-CDS with LAMS was the top procedure for procedural time (SUCRA score = 0.83). Conclusion EUS-CDS with LAMS has the highest technical and clinical success rates and is significantly superior to ERCP as the upfront technique for dMBO treatment. PTBD should be abandoned as first-line treatment due to the poor safety profile.
gastroenterology & hepatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?