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]
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
跳跃大侠完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
吴仙女发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
2秒前
2秒前
Yong完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
跳跃大侠发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
4秒前
诃子应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
4秒前
乐乐应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
小马甲应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
诃子应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
情怀应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
4秒前
成就若颜应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
Hello应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
4秒前
小马甲应助科研通管家采纳,获得20
4秒前
情怀应助科研通管家采纳,获得30
4秒前
4秒前
顾矜应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
诃子应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
科研通AI6.1应助科研通管家采纳,获得150
5秒前
yun发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
脑洞疼应助科研通管家采纳,获得30
5秒前
5秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
无花果应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
科研通AI2S应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
6秒前
微笑初发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
LiuQuan123完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
诃子应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
6秒前
6秒前
6秒前
小蘑菇应助RJ采纳,获得10
6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
Aerospace Standards Index - 2026 ASIN2026 3000
Polymorphism and polytypism in crystals 1000
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Discrete-Time Signals and Systems 610
Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 9th Edition 500
Social Work and Social Welfare: An Invitation(7th Edition) 410
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 纳米技术 有机化学 物理 生物化学 化学工程 计算机科学 复合材料 内科学 催化作用 光电子学 物理化学 电极 冶金 遗传学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6049081
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 7835921
关于积分的说明 16262011
捐赠科研通 5194331
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2779460
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1762688
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1644720