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
隐形曼青应助热情的咖啡采纳,获得10
1秒前
纯真忆安发布了新的文献求助20
2秒前
Jasper应助Danish采纳,获得10
2秒前
1073980795发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
5秒前
carry发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
Jasper应助橘络采纳,获得10
7秒前
8秒前
8秒前
9秒前
安北发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
Overlap发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
Owen应助may采纳,获得10
12秒前
14秒前
yang发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
高分子bro完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
研友_bZzO08完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
隐形曼青应助尘尘笑采纳,获得10
19秒前
21秒前
朴素的黄豆完成签到,获得积分10
25秒前
随风发布了新的文献求助10
25秒前
今后应助小杏仁采纳,获得10
26秒前
1073980795发布了新的文献求助10
26秒前
26秒前
yy完成签到,获得积分20
26秒前
27秒前
bkagyin应助carry采纳,获得10
27秒前
27秒前
科研通AI6.2应助王粒伊采纳,获得10
28秒前
光亮的绮晴完成签到 ,获得积分10
29秒前
30秒前
顾矜应助刘求助采纳,获得10
30秒前
牧青发布了新的文献求助10
30秒前
孤独书白完成签到,获得积分10
31秒前
GGGrigor发布了新的文献求助10
31秒前
g123发布了新的文献求助10
32秒前
33秒前
尘尘笑发布了新的文献求助10
33秒前
CodeCraft应助喜悦的难摧采纳,获得10
35秒前
35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
Les Mantodea de Guyane Insecta, Polyneoptera 2000
Pulse width control of a 3-phase inverter with non sinusoidal phase voltages 777
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Research Methods for Applied Linguistics: A Practical Guide 600
Research Methods for Applied Linguistics 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 6407108
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8226174
关于积分的说明 17446314
捐赠科研通 5459764
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2885088
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1861440
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1701802