Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 Sep;57(9):1023-1033.
doi: 10.1055/a-2577-3814. Epub 2025 Apr 29.

Optimal timing for lumen-apposing metal stent removal following endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Optimal timing for lumen-apposing metal stent removal following endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Marcello Maida et al. Endoscopy. 2025 Sep.

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are widely used for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). Safety is a major concern and the timing of LAMS removal is debated owing to the risk of adverse events (AEs). Previous studies showed early stent removal was associated with a reduced risk of AEs, but data are still conflicting. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to identify the optimal timing for LAMS removal.

Methods: Major databases were systematically searched until May 2024. The outcome assessed was the cumulative incidence of AEs related to the early (within 3-4 weeks) versus late (after 3-4 weeks) removal of the LAMS. A random-effects (DerSimonian-Laird) model was used to pool the results.

Results: Eight studies (1820 patients; mean age 54-61.6 years; 63 % men) were included in the analysis. PFCs included walled-off necrosis (WON; 58.2 %) and pseudocysts (41.8 %). Pooled LAMS-related AEs rate were similar in the late versus early removal groups (risk ratio [RR] 1.03, 95 %CI 0.47-2.28; P = 0.94). Sensitivity analysis, including only studies applying a 4-week cut-off, confirmed a comparable AEs rate (RR 0.80, 95 %CI 0.38-1.65; P = 0.59). The mean (SD) follow-up of the studies was 208 (88) days.

Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis showed no difference in the incidence of AEs between early and late removal of LAMSs in the presence of moderate heterogeneity across studies. Removal within 4 weeks is not warranted, and it may instead be planned on a clinical case-by-case basis according on the patient's condition.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

LinkOut - more resources