Abstract
Although metal stents are increasingly being used for endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collection (PFC), the advantages of metal stents in comparison with plastic stents are not clear. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events between patients receiving endoscopic transmural drainage of PFCs through metal or plastic stents. We performed a systematic literature search to identify all published manuscripts comparing metal and plastic stents for PFC drainage. The primary outcome was clinical success, and the secondary outcomes were technical success, procedure time, overall cost, adverse events, and recurrence. Seven studies were considered to be appropriate for this meta-analysis. Metal stents showed a higher clinical success rate (odds ratio (OR) 3.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05-5.60) and a lower overall adverse event rate (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21-0.66) than plastic stents. In subgroup analyses, metal stents showed higher clinical success rates than plastic stents both for pseudocyst (OR 5.35, 95% CI 1.35-21.19) and walled-off necrosis (OR 3.37, 95% CI 1.89-5.99). Metal stents are superior to plastic stents for endoscopic transmural drainage of PFC because they have a higher clinical success rate and lower rate of adverse events.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
