Cochrane · systematic review · CD008914
Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy
Dong, Z, Xu, J, Wang, Z, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
19
current version
GRADE rated
18
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 1 · 5.3%Very low 0 · 0%Low 12 · 63.2%Moderate 6 · 31.6%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyStents versus no stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy
Population: people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pancreatic fistulas Stents vs no stents | RR 0.67 [0.39, 1.14] | 4 studies · 605 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
In‐hospital mortality Stents vs no stents | RR 0.73 [0.28, 1.94] | 4 studies · 605 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Reoperation Stents vs no stents | RR 0.67 [0.36, 1.22] | 3 studies · 512 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Total hospital stay Stents vs no stents | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 605 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Delayed gastric emptying Stents vs no stents | RR 0.75 [0.24, 2.35] | 3 studies · 371 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Intra‐abdominal abscess Stents vs no stents | RR 1.38 [0.49, 3.85] | 1 study · 234 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Wound infection Stents vs no stents | RR 0.73 [0.4, 1.32] | 4 studies · 605 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Internal stents versus external stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy
Population: people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pancreatic fistulas Internal stents vs external stents | RR 1.44 [0.94, 2.21] | 3 studies · 362 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
In‐hospital mortality Internal stents vs external stents | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.99] | 3 studies · 362 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Reoperation Internal stents vs external stents | RR 2.02 [0.38, 10.79] | 2 studies · 319 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Total hospital stay Internal stents vs external stents | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 262 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Delayed gastric emptying Internal stents vs external stents | RR 1.65 [0.66, 4.09] | 3 studies · 362 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pancreatitis Internal stents vs external stents | RR 0.15 [0.01, 2.73] | 2 studies · 262 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Intra‐abdominal abscess Internal stents vs external stents | RR 1.91 [0.8, 4.58] | 3 studies · 362 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Wound infection Internal stents vs external stents | RR 1.41 [0.44, 4.48] | 2 studies · 319 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
No replacement versus replacement for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy
Population: people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pancreatic fistulas No replacement vs replacement | RR 1.6 [0.84, 3.07] | 1 study · 46 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
In‐hospital mortality No replacement vs replacement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 46 participants | Ungraded |
Total hospital stay No replacement vs replacement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 46 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Delayed gastric emptying No replacement vs replacement | RR 1.05 [0.46, 2.41] | 1 study · 46 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistulas for pancreaticoduodenectomy
Population: patients with pancreaticoduodenectomy
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Internal stents versus no stents | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 234 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stents (external and internal) versus no stents | RR 0.81 [0.59, 1.1] | 3 studies · 512 participants | High |
External stents versus no stents | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 234 participants | High |
Internal stents versus external stents | RR 1.12 [0.65, 1.92] | 2 studies · 143 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |