Background: Hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) is a rare tumor, usually associated with obstructive jaundice and unfavorable prognosis. Obstructive jaundice can affect the liver, kidney, heart, and the immune system of the patients. Currently, controversy exists in whether preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is of any benefit to the patients, and the best way for PBD in patients with resectable HCCA of malignant biliary obstruction remains to be determined.
Objectives: To compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) treatment with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) treatment in patients with malignant biliary obstruction caused by resectable HCCA.
Materials and methods: The databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CBM (China Biological Medicine Database), and CNKI were employed to identify the clinic trials on EBD versus PTBD for malignant biliary obstruction associated with resectable HCCA from January 2008 to October 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out.
Results: Six trials were identified and included in this study. Overall, the differences in technical success rate, R0 resection, incidence of total complication after resection, postoperative hospitalization time, resection time, and recurrence were not statistically significant between the EBD group and PTBD group (all P > .05). However, the incidence of total complications after EBD treatment is higher than that after PTBD treatment (P < .05).
Conclusion: For patients with obstructive jaundice associated with HCCA, current evidence indicate no superiority of PTBD over EBD regarding clinical feasibility and success rate, but data suggest a better clinical safety of PTBD compared with EBD in short-term postoperation. In long-term evaluation, the differences in clinical outcomes are not statistically significant between PTBD and EBD.
Keywords: biliary drainage; hilar cholangiocarcinoma; meta-analysis; obstructive jaundice.