These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Endoscopic Biliary Stenting Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Stenting in Advanced Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Cost-effectiveness Analysis.
    Author: Sun XR, Tang CW, Lu WM, Xu YQ, Feng WM, Bao Y, Zheng YY.
    Journal: Hepatogastroenterology; 2014 May; 61(131):563-6. PubMed ID: 26176036.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and costs between endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary stenting (PTBS). METHODOLOGY: We randomly assigned 112 patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction 2006 and 2011 to receive EBS or PTBS with self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) as palliative treatment. PTBS was successfully performed in 55 patients who formed the PTBS group (failed in 2 patients). EBS was successfully performed in 52 patients who formed the EBS group (failed in 3 patients). The effectiveness of biliary drainage, hospital stay, complications, cost, survival time and mortality were compared. RESULTS: Patients in PTBS group had shorter hospital stay and lower initial and overall expense than the BBS group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in effectiveness of biliary drainage (P = 0.9357) or survival time between two groups (P = 0.6733). Early complications occurred in PTBS group was significantly lower than in EBS group (3/55 vs 11/52, P = 0.0343). Late complications in the EBS group did not differ significantly from PTBS group (7/55 vs 9/52, P = 0.6922). The survival curves in the two groups showed no significant difference (P = 0.5294). Conclusions: 3.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]