Table 2.
Differences between enteral stenting, surgical GJ, and EUS-GE in patients with mGOO.
| Study Design | N° Patients | Treatments Type | Technical Success, % | Clinical Success, % | Reintervention/Recurrence Rate | Hospitalization Median (Days) | Adverse Events | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jang S., 2019 [70] | Retrospective | 183 ES; 127 SGJ | ES; SGJ | 96% ES; 98% SGJ | 79% ES; 80% SGJ | 23% ES; 23% SGJ | 4 ES; 9 SGJ | 6% ES; 16% SGJ |
| Canakis, A. 2023 [93] | Retrospective | 187 EUS-GE; 123 SGJ | EUS-GE; SGJ | 97.8% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 94% EUS-GE; 94% SGJ | 15.5% EUS-GE; 1.63% SGJ | NA | 11.9% EUS-GE; 17.9% SGJ |
| Jeurnick SM, 2010 [96] | Randomized Trial | 18 SGJ; 21 ES | ES; SGJ | 89% SGJ; 77% ES | NA | 11% SGJ; 47% ES | 15 SGJ; 7 ES | 33% SGJ; 47% ES |
| Vanella, 2023 [94] | Prospective | 28 EUS-GE; 28 ES * | EUS-GE; ES | 100% ES; 96,4% EUS-GE | 100% ES; 100% EUS-GE | 33.3% ES; 3.7% EUS-GE | 7 (4–21) ES; 6.5 (3–10.5) EUS-GE | 25% ES; 7.1% EUS-GE |
| Van Wanrooij, 2022 [97] | Retrospective | 88 EUS-GE; 88 ES ** | EUS-GE; ES | EUS-GE 94%; ES 98% | EUS-GE 91%; ES 75% | 1% EUS-GE; 26% ES | 4 (2–10.8) EUS-GE; 4 (1–9.5) ES | 10% EUS-GE; 21% ES |
| Ge, 2019 [98] | Retrospective | 78 ES; 22 EUS-GE | EUS-GE; ES | 100% EUS-GE; 100% ES | 95.8% EUS-GE; 76.3% ES | 8.3% EUS-GE; 32% ES | mean ± SD = 7.4 (9.1) EUS-GE; 7.9 (8.2) ES | 20.8% EUS-GE; 40.2% ES |
| Chen, 2017 [99] | Retrospective | 30 EUS-GE; 52 ES | EUS-GE; ES | 86.7% EUS-GE; 94.2% ES | 83.3% EUS-GE; 67.3% ES | 4% EUS-GE; 28.6% ES | mean ± SD = 11.3 (6.6) EUS-GE; 9.5 (8.3) ES | 16.7% EUS-GE; 11.5% ES |
| Bronswijk, 2021 [100] | Retrospective | 37 EUS-GE; 37 SGJ ** | EUS-GE; SGJ | 94.6% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 97.1% EUS-GE; 89.2% SGJ | 0% EUS-GE; 5.4% SGJ | 4 (2–8) EUS-GE; 8 (5.5–20) EUS-GE | 2.7% EUS-GE; 27% SGJ |
| Khashab, 2016 [101] | Retrospective | 30 EUS-GE; 63 SGJ | EUS-GE; SGJ | 87% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 90% EUS-GE; 87% SGJ | 3% EUS-GE; 14% SGJ | mean ± SD = 11.6 (6.6) EUS-GE; 12 (8.2) SGJ | 16% EUS-GE; 25% SGJ |
| Perez-Miranda, 2017 [102] | Retrospective | 25 EUS-GE; 29 SGJ | EUS-GE; SGJ | 88% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 84% EUS-GE; 90% SGJ | NA | mean: 9.4 EUS-GE; 8.9 SGJ | 12% EUS-GE; 41% SGJ |
| Kouanda, 2021 [103] | Retrospective | 40 EUS-GE; 26 SGJ | EUS-GE; SGJ | 92.5% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 92.5% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 20% EUS-GE; 11.5% SGJ | 5 EUS-GE; 14.5 SGJ | NA |
| Abbas, 2022 [104] | Retrospective | 25 EUS-GE; 27 SGJ | EUS-GE; SGJ | 100% EUS-GE; 100% SGJ | 88% EUS-GE; 85% SGJ | NE | 3.5 (2.5–9.5) EUS-GE; 9.5 (6–12) SGJ | 8% EUS-GE; 41% SGJ |
ES = enteral stenting; SGJ = surgical gastrojejunostomy; EUS-GE = endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastro-enterostomy; NE = not extractable. * EUS-GE and ES cohorts were matched according to baseline frailty and oncologic disease; ** after propensity score matching.