Efficacy of Nasobiliary Tubes and Biliary Stents in Management of Patients with Bile Leak after Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review
Background/Aims Bile leak is one of the most common complications of liver transplantation. The treatment options for bile leaks include conservative management, surgical re-intervention, percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage. We aimed to perform a systematic review to identify the efficacy...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
2019-03-01
|
| Series: | Clinical Endoscopy |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.e-ce.org/upload/pdf/ce-2018-118.pdf |
| Summary: | Background/Aims Bile leak is one of the most common complications of liver transplantation. The treatment options for bile leaks include conservative management, surgical re-intervention, percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage. We aimed to perform a systematic review to identify the efficacy of endoscopic treatment in the resolution of post-transplant bile leaks. Methods Two independent reviewers performed systematic literature search in PubMed, ISI Web of Science, grey literature and relevant references in May 2017. Human studies in English with documented post-liver transplant bile leaks were included. Results Thirty-four studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled efficacy of biliary stents for the resolution of post-transplant bile leaks was 82.43% compared with 87.15% efficacy of nasobiliary tubes. The efficacy of biliary stents was lower for anastomotic leaks (69.23%) compared to T-tube (90.9%) or cut-surface/ cystic duct stump related leaks (92.8%). Similarly, the efficacy of nasobiliary tube was also lower for anastomotic leaks (58.33%) compared to T-tube or cut-surface related leaks (100%). Conclusions In this systematic review, the overall efficacy was 82.43% in biliary stent group, and 87.15% in nasobiliary tube group. Both biliary stent and nasobiliary tube were more effective in managing non-anastomotic leaks compared to anastomotic leaks. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2234-2400 2234-2443 |