Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Uncovered versus covered stent in management of large bowel obstruction due to colorectal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Uncovered versus covered stent in management of large bowel obstruction due to colorectal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Uncovered versus covered stent in management of large bowel obstruction due to colorectal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Uncovered versus covered stent in management of large bowel obstruction due to colorectal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2019
Overview
Purpose
To compare outcomes of uncovered stent and covered stent in management of large bowel obstruction secondary to colorectal malignancy.
Methods
We conducted a search of electronic databases identifying studies comparing outcomes of uncovered and covered stents in management of large bowel obstruction secondary to colorectal malignancy. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale were used to assess the included studies. Random or fixed effects modelling were applied as appropriate to calculate pooled outcome data.
Results
One randomised controlled trial (RCT) and nine observational studies, enrolling 753 patients, were identified. Uncovered stent was associated with lower risks of complications (RR 0.57 95% CI 0.44–0.74,
P
< 0.0001), tumour overgrowth (RR 0.29 95% CI 0.09–0.93,
P
= 0.04), and stent migration (RR 0.29 95% CI 0.17–0.48,
P
< 0.00001); longer duration of patency (MD 18.47 95% CI 10.46–26.48,
P
< 0.00001); lower need for stent reinsertion (RR 0.38 95% CI 0.17–0.86,
P
= 0.02); and higher risk of tumour ingrowth (RR 4.53 95% CI 1.92–10.69,
P
= 0.0008). Rates of technical success (RR 1.02 95% CI 0.99–1.04,
P
= 0.21), clinical success (RR 1.03 95% CI 0.98–1.08,
P
= 0.32), perforation (RD 0.01 95% CI − 0.03–0.02,
P
= 0.65), bleeding (RD 0.00 95% CI − 0.03–0.03,
P
= 0.98), stool impaction (RR 0.56 95% CI 0.12–2.04,
P
= 0.38) and stent obstruction (RR 2.23 95% CI 0.94–5.34,
P
= 0.97) were similar.
Conclusions
Our results suggest that uncovered stents are superior as indicated by fewer complications, lower rates of stent migration, longer duration of patency and a reduced need for stent reinsertion. The best available evidence is mainly derived from non-randomised studies; there is a need for more RCTs.
