A protocolized approach to endoscopic hydrostatic versus pneumatic balloon dilation therapy for gastric sleeve stenosis: a multicenter study and meta-analysis.

医学 荟萃分析 外科 气球 球囊扩张 膨胀(度量空间) 随机对照试验
作者
Veeravich Jaruvongvanich,Reem Matar,Azizullah Beran,Daniel B. Maselli,Andrew C. Storm,Victoria Gomez,Eric J. Vargas,Todd A. Kellogg,Travis J. McKenzie,Rahul Pannala,Manoel Galvao Neto,Andre Texeira,Barham K. Abu Dayyeh
出处
期刊:Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:16 (10): 1543-1553 被引量:2
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2020.05.009
摘要

Abstract Background Gastric sleeve stenosis (GSS) is reported in .7% to 4% of cases after sleeve gastrectomy. Two endoscopic balloon dilation techniques are available with no clear consensus on the therapeutic approach. Objectives To compare the treatment efficacy and safety between hydrostatic and pneumatic balloon dilations for GSS. Setting Academic referral centers, United States and a meta-analysis. Methods Consecutive patients who presented with GSS and underwent endoscopic hydrostatic and/or pneumatic balloon dilations at 3 tertiary care hospitals were included. Clinical success was defined as an improvement of symptoms that allowed the patient to avoid further interventions. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies for meta-analysis. Results Of 46 patients, 13 had pneumatic dilation only, 26 had hydrostatic dilation only, and 7 had pneumatic dilation after failed hydrostatic dilation. Clinical success was not significantly different among the 3 groups with the success rates of 30.8%, 57.6%, and 57.1% (P = .25) after single dilation and 61.5%, 63.6%, and 71.4% (P = .90) after serial dilations in the pneumatic group, hydrostatic group, and pneumatic after failed hydrostatic group, respectively. Patients who failed hydrostatic balloon dilation (n = 7) had a success rate of 71.4% with subsequent pneumatic dilation. Two serious adverse events were observed in the pneumatic group, whereas none were observed in the hydrostatic group. A meta-analysis of 16 studies involving 360 patients demonstrated higher clinical success with single pneumatic balloon dilation compared with hydrostatic balloon dilation (62.2% versus 36.4%; P = .007) with higher adverse events (3 versus 0 events). Conclusions Hydrostatic balloon dilation should be considered as an initial modality for GSS given its acceptable success rate and high safety profile. In those who fail hydrostatic balloon dilation, a subsequent step-up approach to pneumatic balloon dilation or revisional surgery should be attempted.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
唯有长青完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
胡慧婷发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
殷勤的听枫完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
小鱼仔发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
向北游发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
852应助活吞鲨鱼采纳,获得10
2秒前
传奇3应助Accept采纳,获得10
3秒前
Alexa完成签到,获得积分0
3秒前
6秒前
zyc发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
6秒前
7秒前
w123发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
8秒前
9秒前
10秒前
哭泣耷发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
醉心发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
宋不凡发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
13秒前
13秒前
11发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
英俊的铭应助Lin采纳,获得10
14秒前
明亮沛蓝发布了新的文献求助10
15秒前
15秒前
深情沧海应助加州采纳,获得20
16秒前
Tina完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助小鱼仔采纳,获得10
17秒前
wait发布了新的文献求助10
19秒前
21秒前
st关闭了st文献求助
23秒前
23秒前
Hello应助yj采纳,获得10
23秒前
HuYY完成签到,获得积分10
25秒前
26秒前
26秒前
26秒前
哭泣耷完成签到,获得积分10
29秒前
30秒前
活吞鲨鱼发布了新的文献求助10
30秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Cowries - A Guide to the Gastropod Family Cypraeidae 1200
Quality by Design - An Indispensable Approach to Accelerate Biopharmaceutical Product Development 800
Pulse width control of a 3-phase inverter with non sinusoidal phase voltages 777
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
A Social and Cultural History of the Hellenistic World 500
Chemistry and Physics of Carbon Volume 15 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6397542
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8212928
关于积分的说明 17401464
捐赠科研通 5450944
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2881170
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1857682
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1699724