Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Sep 14, 2017; 23(34): 6273-6280
Published online Sep 14, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i34.6273
Table 1 Comparison of the characteristics and the target biliary duct status of patients in the success and failure groups
Success (n = 49)Failure (n = 13)P value
Age, median (range), yr74 (42-88)71 (16-76)0.45
Sex (male), n (%)33 (67.3)8 (61.5)0.75
Diagnoses
Primary lesion (Biliary tract or pancreatic cancer)40100.70
Metastases93
Pancreatic cancer1
Lung cancer1
Tracheal cancer1
Colon cancer32
Uterine cancer1
Gastric cancer11
Prostatic cancer1
Bismuth classification0.98
II123
III185
IV195
Target biliary duct status,
Diameter of the target biliary duct, median (range), mm6.4 (2.0-15.9)6.6 (4.4-17.3)10.45
Diameter of the target biliary stricture, median (range), mm0 (0-1.6)0 (0-0.9)0.94
Diameter of the first implanted SEMS, median (range), mm5.8 (3.1-11.7)6.7 (3.4-12.6)0.25
Length of the target biliary stricture, median (range), mm11.0 (3.0-69.6)7.9 (1.7-34.2)10.44
Angle between the target biliary duct stricture and the first implanted SEMS, median (range), degree44.4 (7-119)75.3 (28-109.3)1< 0.01