» Articles » PMID: 39174997

The Safety of Not Implementing Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage After Elective Clearance of Choledocholithiasis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal BMC Surg
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2024 Aug 22
PMID 39174997
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) is used as a drainage technique in patients with choledocholithiasis after stone removal. However, ENBD can cause discomfort, displacement, and other complications. This study aims to evaluate the safety of not using ENBD following elective clearance of choledocholithiasis.

Methods: Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library from their inception until August 2023. The main outcomes assessed were postoperative complications and postoperative outcomes. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on study design types and treatment procedures.

Results: Six studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three cohort studies, were analyzed. Among these, four studies utilized endoscopic techniques, and two employed surgical methods for choledocholithiasis clearance. The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in postoperative complications between the no-ENBD and ENBD groups, including pancreatitis (RR: 1.55, p = 0.36), cholangitis (RR: 1.81, p = 0.09), and overall complications (RR: 1.25, p = 0.38). Regarding postoperative outcomes, the subgroup analysis indicated that the bilirubin normalization time was longer in the no-ENBD group compared to the ENBD group in RCTs (WMD: 0.24, p = 0.07) and endoscopy studies (WMD: 0.23, p = 0.005), although the former did not reach statistical difference. There was also no significant difference in the length of postoperative hospital stay between the groups (WMD: -0.30, p = 0.60).

Conclusion: It appears safe to no- ENBD after elective clearance of choledocholithiasis.

Citing Articles

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis: A meta‑analysis.

Xuan W, Zhang X, Fang Y, Zhang Y, Xiang Z, Yu Y Oncol Lett. 2025; 29(3):122.

PMID: 39807096 PMC: 11726279. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2025.14868.

References
1.
Ingeman A, Andersen G, Hundborg H, Svendsen M, Johnsen S . In-hospital medical complications, length of stay, and mortality among stroke unit patients. Stroke. 2011; 42(11):3214-8. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.610881. View

2.
Wu Y, Xu C, Xu S . Advances in Risk Factors for Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones. Int J Med Sci. 2021; 18(4):1067-1074. PMC: 7807200. DOI: 10.7150/ijms.52974. View

3.
Lai E, Mok F, Tan E, Lo C, Fan S, You K . Endoscopic biliary drainage for severe acute cholangitis. N Engl J Med. 1992; 326(24):1582-6. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199206113262401. View

4.
Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L, Anderloni A, Arvanitakis M, Ah-Soune P . Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy. 2019; 51(5):472-491. DOI: 10.1055/a-0862-0346. View

5.
Bradley 3rd E . A clinically based classification system for acute pancreatitis. Ann Chir. 1993; 47(6):537-41. View