Original Article
Endoscopic stenting versus operative gastrojejunostomy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials
Abstract
Background: Open surgical gastrojejunostomy (GJ) has been the treatment of choice, but it has high morbidity and mortality rates. During the last decade, endoscopic self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) have been used. This meta-analysis aimed to compare surgical GJ and endoscopic stenting in palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO).
Methods: A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The search identified 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-RCTs reporting on patients who underwent surgical GJ or endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal outflow obstruction
Results: The results of the three RCTs demonstrated that SEMS resulted in comparable major [odds ratio (OR): 0.62, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.021-18.371] and minor (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.049-2.089) complications in a shorter time to tolerating an oral intake (SEMS: 3.55 days and GJ: 7.15 days) and shorter hospital stay (SEMS: 5.1 days and GJ: 12.13 days, however, statistical insignificant P value =0.11). Among the non RCTs: SEMS resulted in a shorter time to tolerating an oral intake (SEMS: 1.48 days and GJ: 8.07 days, P value <0.01), similar rate of complications (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.1-1.08), lower mortality (OR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.21-1.20, P value <0.01) and a shorter hospital stay (SEMS: 7.61 days and GJ: 19.04 days, P value <0.0001). There was no significant difference between median survival times among RCTs and non RCTs.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that stent placement is associated with better short-term outcomes and hence, duodenal stenting is a safe means of palliating malignant gastric outflow obstruction. However, a large RCT is needed to systematically compare stent placement with GJ with regard to medical effects, quality of life and costs.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The search identified 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-RCTs reporting on patients who underwent surgical GJ or endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal outflow obstruction
Results: The results of the three RCTs demonstrated that SEMS resulted in comparable major [odds ratio (OR): 0.62, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.021-18.371] and minor (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.049-2.089) complications in a shorter time to tolerating an oral intake (SEMS: 3.55 days and GJ: 7.15 days) and shorter hospital stay (SEMS: 5.1 days and GJ: 12.13 days, however, statistical insignificant P value =0.11). Among the non RCTs: SEMS resulted in a shorter time to tolerating an oral intake (SEMS: 1.48 days and GJ: 8.07 days, P value <0.01), similar rate of complications (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.1-1.08), lower mortality (OR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.21-1.20, P value <0.01) and a shorter hospital stay (SEMS: 7.61 days and GJ: 19.04 days, P value <0.0001). There was no significant difference between median survival times among RCTs and non RCTs.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that stent placement is associated with better short-term outcomes and hence, duodenal stenting is a safe means of palliating malignant gastric outflow obstruction. However, a large RCT is needed to systematically compare stent placement with GJ with regard to medical effects, quality of life and costs.
