Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

doi:10.4253/wjge.v11.i4.281

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 11, Issue 4

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (10018)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-7) series, Tables (1-3) series.

Item

Count

PDF

447

WORD

261

HTML

6117

Figures (1-7)

258

Tables (1-3)

206

Sum=7289

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

1068

Download

1661

Sum=2729

Apr 16, 2019 (publication date) through Nov 2, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (28)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

ISSN

1948-5190

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Meta-Analysis

World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 16, 2019; 11(4): 281-291
Published online Apr 16, 2019. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v11.i4.281

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Fernanda P Logiudice, Wanderlei M Bernardo, Facundo Galetti, Vitor M Sagae, Carolina O Matsubayashi, Antonio C Madruga Neto, Vitor O Brunaldi, Diogo T H de Moura, Tomazo Franzini, Spencer Cheng, Sergio E Matuguma, Eduardo G H de Moura

Fernanda P Logiudice, Wanderlei M Bernardo, Facundo Galetti, Vitor M Sagae, Carolina O Matsubayashi, Antonio C Madruga Neto, Vitor O Brunaldi, Tomazo Franzini, Spencer Cheng, Sergio E Matuguma, Eduardo G H de Moura, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil

Diogo T H de Moura, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, United States

Author contributions: Logiudice FP acquisition of data, analysis, interpretation of data, drafting the article, revising the article, final approval; Bernardo WM analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, final approval; Galetti F acquisition of data, drafting the article, revising the article; Sagae VM acquisition of data, drafting the article, revising the article; Matsubayashi CO acquisition of data, drafting the article, revising the article; Madruga Neto AC acquisition of data, drafting the article, revising the article, final approval; Brunaldi VO analysis and interpretation of data, critical revision, final approval; de Moura DTH analysis and interpretation of data, revised the article; Franzini T analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, revising the article, final approval; Cheng S analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, revising the article, final approval; Matuguma E analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, revising the article, final approval; de Moura EGH conception and design of the study, critical revision, final approval.

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors deny any conflict of interest.

PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.

Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Corresponding author: Fernanda P Logiudice, MD, Attending Doctor, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar 255, Instituto Central, Prédio dos Ambulatórios, Pinheiros, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil. fernanda.logiudice@gmail.com

Telephone: +55-11-997311353 Fax: +55-11-26616467

Received: February 2, 2019
Peer-review started: February 11, 2019
First decision: March 11, 2019
Revised: March 18, 2019
Accepted: March 26, 2019
Article in press: March 26, 2019
Published online: April 16, 2019
Processing time: 75 Days and 5.1 Hours

Core Tip

Core tip: No consensus is available in the literature regarding whether endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage is more beneficial to the patient. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the two methods. We investigated these two techniques in terms of technical and clinical success, as well as duration of the procedure, adverse events, stent dysfunction and stent patency.