Endoluminal radiofrequency ablation with stenting versus stenting alone in patients with malignant biliary obstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridMaida, Marcello Fabio/0000-0002-4992-9289
dc.authoridChandan, Saurabh/0000-0002-2661-6693
dc.authoridHuang, Yuting/0000-0001-9986-5124
dc.authoridWang, Yichen/0000-0003-0723-5913;
dc.contributor.authorRamai, Daryl
dc.contributor.authorMaida, Marcello
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Eric R.
dc.contributor.authorWang, Yichen
dc.contributor.authorSpadaccini, Marco
dc.contributor.authorPrevitera, Melissa
dc.contributor.authorChandan, Saurabh
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-11T20:48:24Z
dc.date.available2025-10-11T20:48:24Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentDüzce Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Endoluminal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a palliative treatment for patients suffering from malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of RFA on stent patency, patient survival, and adverse events. Methods: Major databases were searched through December 2023 for patients who had undergone stenting with or without RFA for extrahepatic MBO. A random-effects model was used for analysis, with results expressed as relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95%CIs. Results: Nine RCTs involving 750 subjects with MBO (374 RFA plus stent vs. 376 stent only) were included. Meta-analysis revealed similar risks of stent patency at 3 months (RR 1.01, 95%CI 0.92-1.11; I (2) = 4%) for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only. Meta-analysis showed improved survival at 6 months (RR 0.84, 95%CI 0.73-0.96; I (2) = 21%; P = 0.01) for RFA plus stenting vs. stent only. Subgroup analysis comparing plastic vs. uncovered metal stents showed that stent patency was unaffected at 3 months (RR 1.06, 95%CI 0.91-1.23; I (2) = 17%). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with cholangiocarcinoma experienced an overall survival benefit with RFA plus stenting vs. stenting alone (P < 0.001); however, stent patency remained unaffected (P = 0.08). An increased incidence of cholecystitis was noted with RFA plus stenting vs. stenting alone (5.1% [95%CI 3.1%-7.8%] vs. 0.3% [95%CI 0.01%-1.5%], respectively). Conclusion: Combining endoluminal RFA and stenting may improve overall survival in patients with MBO. RFA did not significantly impact stent patency.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1055/a-2378-9533
dc.identifier.endpage281en_US
dc.identifier.issn0013-726X
dc.identifier.issn1438-8812
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid39094769en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85209154225en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage272en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1055/a-2378-9533
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12684/21901
dc.identifier.volume57en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001349387400001en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherGeorg Thieme Verlag Kgen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEndoscopyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryDiğeren_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250911
dc.titleEndoluminal radiofrequency ablation with stenting versus stenting alone in patients with malignant biliary obstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized trialsen_US
dc.typeReviewen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu