Comparison of Duodenal Stenting and Gastrojejunostomy for Duodenal Obstruction with Biliary Obstruction
Background The best palliation for double obstruction (duodenal obstruction with biliary obstruction) remains unclear. We aimed to compare outcomes of duodenal stenting (DuS) with gastrojejunostomy (GJ) and identify factors associated with survival time and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRB...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of gastrointestinal surgery Vol. 26; no. 9; pp. 1853 - 1862 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
New York
Springer US
01.09.2022
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Background
The best palliation for double obstruction (duodenal obstruction with biliary obstruction) remains unclear. We aimed to compare outcomes of duodenal stenting (DuS) with gastrojejunostomy (GJ) and identify factors associated with survival time and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO).
Methods
Patients who underwent DuS or GJ combined with biliary stenting for double obstruction due to unresectable malignancy were retrospectively enrolled.
Results
In total, 111 patients were included; 84 underwent DuS, and 27 underwent GJ. The weighted survival time of the DuS group was significantly shorter than that of the GJ group (86 days vs 134 days, P < 0.01). Although the weighted TRBO was not significantly different between the two groups, when limited to patients with distal duodenal obstruction, the weighted TRBO was significantly longer in the DuS group than in the GJ group (207 days vs. 32 days, P < 0.01). GJ for distal duodenal obstruction was identified as the factor with the highest hazard ratio and was associated with a shorter TRBO (hazard ratio 8.5, P < 0.01).
Conclusions
Regarding survival time, GJ should be considered the primary treatment for patients with double obstruction. However, for patients with distal duodenal obstruction, DuS should be considered because GJ may be a risk factor for a shorter TRBO. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1091-255X 1873-4626 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s11605-022-05353-6 |