• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Bilateral vs unilateral placement of metal stents for inoperable highgrade hilar biliary strictures: A systemic review and meta-analysis

    2019-09-25 08:12:42MunishAshatSumantAroraJagpalKlairChristopherChildsArvindMuraliFrederickJohlin
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2019年34期

    Munish Ashat, Sumant Arora, Jagpal S Klair, Christopher A Childs, Arvind R Murali, Frederick C Johlin

    Abstract BACKGROUND Bilateral vs unilateral biliary stenting is used for palliation in malignant biliary obstruction. No clear data is available to compare the efficacy and safety of bilateral biliary stenting over unilateral stenting.AIM To assess the efficacy and safety of bilateral vs unilateral biliary drainage in inoperable malignant hilar obstruction.METHODS PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, as well as secondary sources(bibliographic review of selected articles and major GI proceedings), were searched through January 2019. The primary outcome was the re-intervention rate. Secondary outcomes were a technical success, early and late complications,and stent malfunction rate. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval(CI) were calculated for each outcome.RESULTS A total of 9 studies were included (2 prospective Randomized Controlled Study,5 retrospective studies, and 2 abstracts), involving 782 patients with malignant hilar obstruction. Bilateral stenting had significantly lower re-intervention rate compared with unilateral drainage (OR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.40-0.87, P = 0.009). There was no difference in the technical success rate (OR = 0.7, CI: 0.42-1.17, P = 0.17),early complication rate (OR = 1.56, CI: 0.31-7.75, P = 0.59), late complication rate(OR = 0.91, CI: 0.58-1.41, P = 0.56) and stent malfunction (OR = 0.69, CI: 0.42-1.12,P = 0.14) between bilateral and unilateral stenting for malignant hilar biliary strictures.CONCLUSION Bilateral biliary drainage had a lower re-intervention rate as compared to unilateral drainage for high grade inoperable malignant biliary strictures, with no significant difference in technical success, and early or late complication rates.

    Key words: Metal stent; Hilar biliary stricture; Re-intervention rate; Technical success rate

    INTRODUCTION

    Unresectable malignant hilar obstruction (UMHO) is associated with very poor prognosis. Five-year survival is < 10% with most patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis[1,2]. Compared to plastic stents, self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) have shown to be more cost effective and provides advantage with longer stent patency and less re-intervention rate in patients with non-operable malignancy with score of II to IV on Bismuth-Corlette classification and Hilar cholangiocarcinoma who have a predicted the life expectancy of > 3 mo[3-5]. Biliary stenting also plays a role in the management of obstructive jaundice and cholangitis and is important in enhancing the quality of life of patients with UMHO.

    Although endoscopic stenting is widely favored in cases of UMHO, there is currently no consensus on whether the placement of bilateral biliary stents has any advantage for these patients over unilateral stenting. Although some experts believe in measuring the volume of the liver to be drained to determine the type of stent to be used, quantification of the liver volume is clinically challenging. Furthermore, there have been conflicting data regarding the technical success and outcomes of bilateral and unilateral stenting. While some authors believe that unilateral stenting renders increased technical success rate with concomitant lower complications[6-8]; bilateral stenting, on the other hand, will drain higher liver volume, may have longer stent patency, and hence may require less re-intervention[9-11].

    The aim of the meta-analysis was to systematically review the current literature and compare the efficacy of unilateralvsbilateral stenting in achieving successful stent placement, comparing re-intervention rate, technical success, and early and late procedure-related complications for unresectable malignant hilar strictures.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Data sources and searches

    Search strategies were developed with the assistance of a health sciences librarian with expertise in searching for systematic reviews. Comprehensive search strategies using index and keywords were constructed for PubMed, Embase (Elsevier), and Cinhal (EBSCO). No database filters were used at any time during the searching process. All searches were conducted during January 2019 and the number of citations found in each database can be found in the flow diagram (Figure 1). The searches combined the following concepts: Unilateral SEMS and bilateral SEMS with biliary stents. Within the results for those combined concepts, additional filters, publication types, and keyword strategies were used to identify and exclude the most common articles types that do not report trial results (reviews and case studies). An exhaustive forward search tool was used for the Web of Science database to capture all possible studies of interest. The databases were searched for publications dates 1995 to present.Language limits were applied to search for articles in English only. To identify further articles, references were hand searched. All results were downloaded into EndNote(Thompson ISI Research Soft, Philadelphia, PA, United States), a bibliographic database manager, and duplicate citations were identified and removed. In addition,abstracts from Digestive Disease Week, annual meetings of American College of Gastroenterology, and United European Gastroenterology Week from the last 5 years were also searched.

    Inclusion criteria

    Prospective studies, retrospective studies, and abstracts published in the English language were included if they compared unilateralvsbilateral SEMS biliary stent placement, for one or more of the clinical outcomes: Re-intervention rate, technical success, complication rate, and stent malfunction.

    Exclusion criteria

    Studies were excluded when there was no comparison between unilateral and bilateral stents. We also excluded studies that did not evaluate the required predefined endpoints. Furthermore, duplicate studies, case reports, animal studies, and letters to editors were excluded.

    Data extraction

    Two authors (Ashat M and Arora S) independently extracted the data according to a pre-specified protocol from all the included studies. All discrepancies were resolved after discussion with a third reviewer.

    Quality assessment and risk of bias

    Cohort studies were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and for randomized control trials, Cochrane tool was used to assess for risk of bias[12,13]. Risk of publication bias for each end-point was assessed using the funnel plots.

    Outcome

    The data collected from eligible studies included following data points-publication year, authors, country of publication, study design, mean age of study participants, a total number of patients in each unilateral stenting and bilateral stenting category and type of malignancy, complications rates, and type of complications Supplemental(Table 1).

    Primary end-point of the study was the re-intervention rate. This was defined as an endoscopic or percutaneous intervention that was done for stent failure and to increase biliary drainage or for recurrent jaundice, or for management of dilated intrahepatic bile duct revealed by imaging or management of immediate adverse event of successfully inserted SEMS. Secondary outcomes were (1) Technical success was defined by the successful placement of bilateral or unilateral SEMS across stricture site, confirmed by the flow of contrast or bile through SEMS; (2) Early adverse event rate- defined as early stent-related complications within 4 wk. Early complications included cholangitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and liver abscess; (3) Late adverse events were defined as any stent-related complication that occurred after 4 wk of stent insertion. Late complication included cholangitis, cholecystitis, liver abscess; and (4) Stent malfunction defined as stent obstruction due to sludge or stone formation, cholangitis, tumor in-growth, or development of a liver abscess, or biloma.

    Statistical analysis

    Review Manager 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) was used to analyze the data for the meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95%confidence interval (CI) of study end-points were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. In order to access of heterogeneity, we usedX2test (Cochran Q statistic). In case there was significant heterogeneity, a random-effect model was used.Funnel plots were obtained to assess the risk of bias.

    RESULTS

    Using pre-defined parameters and removing duplicate publications our search strategy identified 281 articles. Another 2 articles were identified by manual search. A total of 262 articles were excluded based on our exclusion criterion. Based on our inclusion criterions, 9 studies were selected (Figure 1). Of these 9 studies, 7 were published manuscripts and 2 were published as abstracts. All the baseline characteristics of each individual studies are highlighted in Supplemental Table 1.

    Figure 1 PRISMA diagram of the literature search.

    Study characteristics

    The characteristics of the studies, and of the patients in the selected studies are shown in Supplemental Table 1. A total of 9 studies were enrolled in the current study of which 2 were randomized control trial’s (RCT), and 7 were retrospective trials (5 complete manuscripts and 2 abstracts). Although the study by Mukaiet al[14]was an RCT, for our analysis we used only bilateral stents subgroup of the study which was not randomized. A total of 782 patients were included in the analysis of bilateralvsunilateral biliary stenting.

    Results of meta-analysis

    Primary end-point:Re-intervention rate: A total of 7 studies involving 513 patients was included in this analysis[7,10,14-18]. Bilateral stenting required significantly lower reintervention as compared to unilateral stenting (OR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.40-0.87,P=0.009) (Figure 2). The funnel plot showed no asymmetry (Figure 3).

    Secondary end-points:(1) Technical success: A total of 8 studies involving 745 patients was included in this analysis[7,10,14,15,17-20]. There was no significant difference in the technical success rate with bilateral stenting as compared to unilateral stenting(OR = 0.7, 95%CI: 0.42-1.17,P= 0.17) (Figure 4). There was mild heterogeneity; (2)Early complications: A total of 5 studies involving 530 patients were included in this analysis[7,10,18-20]. There was no difference between early complications (OR = 1.56,95%CI: 0.31-7.75,P= 0.0001) (Figure 5); (3) Late complications: A total of 5 studies involving 430 patients were included in this analysis[7,10,15,18,20]. There was no difference in late complication rate (OR = 0.91, 95%CI: 0.58-1.41,P= 0.56) (Figure 6); and (4)Stent malfunction: A total of 4 studies involving 324 patients was included in this analysis[7,10,15,18]. There was no difference in stent malfunction rates (OR = 0.69, 95%CI:0.42-1.12,P= 0.14) (Figure 7).

    Quality assessment and funnel plots

    The Newcastle Ottawa Scale score has been provided for all retrospective studies in Supplemental Table 1. The Cochrane collaboration tool assessment of bias for the RCT has been provided in Figure 8. Funnel plots to estimate bias revealed no asymmetry(Figure 3).

    DISCUSSION

    Endoscopic biliary drainage is the intervention of choice in patients with UMHO.Besides providing symptomatic relief to patients with pruritis it also has therapeutic implications with a reduction in total bilirubin which permits the use of subsequent chemotherapy, radiotherapy or photodynamic therapy. This may be important in prolonging the life of patients with unresectable malignant biliary strictures. Over the past decade, multiple studies have found using metallic stents over plastic stents as more cost-effective in hilar cholangiocarcinoma[4,14,21,22]. However, the data comparing bilateralvsunilateral stenting in UMHO is sparse. There has been conflicting data in regards to the outcomes of placement of bilateralvsunilateral SEMS stents[7,8,10,18,23,24].Therefore, we designed this meta-analysis to review the data, thus-far available,comparing bilateralvsunilateral SEMS placement for UMHO. Our meta-analysis shows that bilateral stenting as compared to unilateral stenting is associated with a lower re-intervention rate, but has a comparable technical success rate, early and late complication rates.

    Figure 2 Forest plot of re-intervention rates with bilateral self expanding metal stents vs unilateral stent. SEMS: Self expanding metal stents; OR: Odds ratio;CI: Confidence interval.

    Bilateral stenting was associated with a statistically significant 41% reduction in reintervention rate. There has been marked variability in results among published literature. A prospective trial by Mukaiet al[14]demonstrated 50% re-intervention rate in bilateral SEMS group compared to 29% in unilateral SEMS group. However, the study groups were not treated similarly in their study, as patients who received bilateral stent received sphincterotomy while patients receiving unilateral stent did not. In the prospective RCT by Leeet al[10], the authors showed a statistically significant lower re-intervention rate at 3 mo for bilateral SEMS groupvsunilateral SEMS group (10.9%vs33.3%). The ability to reduce the number of interventions is of paramount importance in patients with non-operable malignant hilar strictures and an average life expectancy < 12 mo, thus avoiding multiple hospitalizations, which inreturn could mean an overall more cost-effective approach and also will have an impact on improving the quality of life for patients[18,25]. Further, restoration of bile flow with bilateral stenting is physiologically more superior to unilateral stenting.Approximately 25%-30% liver needs to be drained in order to satisfactorily reduce jaundice[8,26]. Though unilateral stent should be able to drain at-least 25% of the liver,clinical evidence suggests that up to 30% cases of hilar cholangiocarcinoma are associated with hepatic lobar atrophy[27], and thus in such a situation, unilateral stenting may not provide an appropriate therapeutic response and may increase primary re-intervention rates. Furthermore, a study by Vienneet al[28]suggested that draining more than 50% of the liver volume is an important predictor of the effectiveness of biliary drainage especially in malignant hilar strictures.

    The conflicting data is further complicated by the technical difficulties associated with the placement of bilateral stents. Thus, multiple newer stent delivery systems have been developed to overcome this technical challenge. In our study, there was no significant difference in the technical success between bilateral biliary stenting and unilateral biliary stenting. A meta-analysis by Hong Wet al[24]concluded higher success with unilateral stenting. However, their meta-analysis included studies involving plastic biliary stents which may have affected the results. Our results are similar to results by Naitohet al[18]and Iwanoet al[7]who had similar technical success for bilateral and unilateral stents. Bilateral stents could be placed by either stent-instent technique (SIS) or side-by-side technique (SBS). Naitohet aluse stent in stent technique and Iwanoet alused SIS technique respectively in their patients Although,this meta-analysis did not specifically compare the two techniques of bilateral stenting, a meta-analysis by Naitohet al[18]showed longer stent patency time with SBS group when compared to SIS group. Provider expertise could also account for the variability in the technical success rate among the studies. Thus, based on our results,we believe that bilateral stenting may be preferable for providers who are technically adept at placing both bilateral and unilateral stent.

    Figure 3 Cochrane collaboration tool. Risk assessment.

    Stent malfunction could be driving our primary outcome of stent re-intervention rates. The rate of reintervention was influenced by stent malfunction, however, not all studies defined the cause of stent malfunction clearly (Supplemental Table 2) and hence we only included stent malfunction as a secondary outcome. There was a trend towards decreased stent malfunction with bilateral drainage as compared to unilateral drainage though this was not statistically different. Earlier studies seemed to suggest that bilateral stents could lead to increased stent-related early complications. SBS was associated with increased cholangitis rates and portal vein occlusion because of excessive expansion of the bile duct by parallel stents[18]. SIS deployment could lead to increased sludge formation at the site of stent overlap as a result of a reduction in bile inflow and increase the incidence of tumor ingrowth if the stent mesh is expanded in the area of overlap[17]. In contrast, most recent RCT by Leeet al[10]has shown no difference in rates of cholangitis and liver abscess after bilateral stent placement.Similarly, in our meta-analysis, there was no difference with stent-related early or late complication rates between the two groups.

    There are several limitations to this meta-analysis. The main limitation is that only two studies included in our meta-analysis are RCT’s. Most studies are retrospective studies which could have led to selection bias. Nevertheless, the retrospective studies are reasonable quality cohort studies, as determined by the Modified Newcastle Ottawa quality assessment scale of cohort studies. Another limitation is the presence of significant heterogeneity in some of the analysis. This is likely due to the significant clinical heterogeneity among the studies the differences in the study population, the location of malignant strictures, technical expertise of the providers, and the difference in the duration. However, importantly, there was only mild heterogeneity in the analysis of our primary end-point analysis of re-intervention rate and in the analysis for technical success. For analysis with significant heterogeneity, we used a random effects model to partly account for the clinical heterogeneity. This highlights the need for further research on this topic and the importance of our meta-analysis based on available data.

    In conclusion, bilateral biliary stenting for UMHO may decrease the re-intervention rate in patients with malignant hilar strictures, without increasing early or late complication rate. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis so far comparing the outcomes of SEMS bilateralvsunilateral stenting. Further RCT’s are needed to confirm our findings.

    Figure 4 Forest plot of technical success rates with bilateral self expanding metal stents vs unilateral stent. SEMS: Self expanding metal stents; OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

    Figure 5 Forest plot of early complication rates with bilateral self expanding metal stents vs unilateral stent. SEMS: Self expanding metal stents; OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

    Figure 6 Forest plot of late complication rates with bilateral self expanding metal stents vs unilateral stent. SEMS: Self expanding metal stents; OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

    Figure 7 Forest plot of stent malfunction rates with bilateral self expanding metal stents vs unilateral stent. SEMS: Self expanding metal stents; OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

    Figure 8 Risk of bias summary: Review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    The background, present status, and significance of the study should be described in detail.

    Research motivation

    Over the past few years, newer randomized control trials (RCTs have been published showing the overall advantage of bilateral biliary stenting over unilateral stenting in a subset of patients with inoperable hilar malignant strictures. No meta-analysis was done on this topic with newer study data points.

    Research objectives

    We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the role of bilateral stentingvsunilateral stenting in inoperable malignant hilar strictures.

    Research methods

    A detailed literature search was conducted to find all the relevant articles. Two reviewers independently analyzed all the selected studies. All discrepancies were discussed independently with the third reviewer and consensus was achieved. We used Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome.

    Research results

    A total of 782 patients form nine studies were included for analysis. Bilateral stenting had significantly lower re-intervention rate compared with unilateral drainage (OR = 0.59, 95%CI:0.40-0.87, P = 0.009). There was no difference in the technical success rate (OR = 0.7, CI: 0.42-1.17,P = 0.17), early complication rate (OR = 1.56, CI: 0.31-7.75,P= 0.59), late complication rate (OR =0.91, CI: 0.58-1.41, P = 0.56) and stent malfunction (OR = 0.69, CI: 0.42-1.12,P= 0.14) between bilateral and unilateral stenting for malignant hilar biliary strictures.

    Research conclusions

    Older studies that have shown the ease of putting unilateral stenting with fewer complications over bilateral stenting in inoperable malignant hilar strictures. However, with new RCTs showing the higher success of bilateral biliary stenting with lower re-intervention rates, bilateral stenting could offer an overall advantage over unilateral stenting. Our study highlights the overall advantage of bilateral stenting over unilateral stenting.

    Research perspectives

    Biliary stenting is very important modality in the overall management of inoperable malignant hilar strictures. Bilateral stenting offers an advantage over unilateral stenting, however more RCT is required to further support this conclusion.

    九九热线精品视视频播放| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 高清在线视频一区二区三区 | 国产成年人精品一区二区| 黄色一级大片看看| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 深夜a级毛片| 国产午夜精品论理片| 中文字幕制服av| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 日本与韩国留学比较| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 欧美3d第一页| 国产成人福利小说| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 插逼视频在线观看| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 乱人视频在线观看| 精品久久久噜噜| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 一级爰片在线观看| 长腿黑丝高跟| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 成人综合一区亚洲| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看 | 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 毛片女人毛片| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 91狼人影院| 国产成人a区在线观看| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 色吧在线观看| 少妇丰满av| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| h日本视频在线播放| 看黄色毛片网站| 午夜久久久久精精品| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| av.在线天堂| 少妇的逼水好多| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 日本黄色片子视频| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 综合色丁香网| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 日本午夜av视频| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 观看免费一级毛片| 性色avwww在线观看| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 久久热精品热| 大香蕉久久网| 免费av观看视频| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 国产高清三级在线| 少妇的逼水好多| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 亚洲怡红院男人天堂| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 一级黄色大片毛片| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| av国产免费在线观看| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 97在线视频观看| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 男人舔奶头视频| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 人妻系列 视频| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 男女国产视频网站| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 国产精品无大码| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 91精品国产九色| 禁无遮挡网站| av视频在线观看入口| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 日韩中字成人| 午夜福利在线在线| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 久热久热在线精品观看| 成人av在线播放网站| 午夜福利视频1000在线观看| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 床上黄色一级片| 在线免费观看的www视频| 热99在线观看视频| 日本与韩国留学比较| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 黄色日韩在线| 中文资源天堂在线| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 久久人妻av系列| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 在线免费十八禁| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 欧美激情在线99| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合 | 久久久久久久久久黄片| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 午夜日本视频在线| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 成人欧美大片| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 国产成人精品婷婷| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 草草在线视频免费看| 国产不卡一卡二| 免费观看a级毛片全部| av免费观看日本| 3wmmmm亚洲av在线观看| 高清av免费在线| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| videossex国产| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 老司机影院成人| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 99热6这里只有精品| 久久草成人影院| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 午夜日本视频在线| www日本黄色视频网| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| av免费在线看不卡| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看 | 视频中文字幕在线观看| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 嫩草影院新地址| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 精品午夜福利在线看| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 国产淫语在线视频| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 舔av片在线| 国产av在哪里看| kizo精华| 成人国产麻豆网| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 国产三级在线视频| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 中文字幕久久专区| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 午夜视频国产福利| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 搞女人的毛片| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 国产探花极品一区二区| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 精品久久国产蜜桃| 欧美性感艳星| av在线播放精品| 视频中文字幕在线观看| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 在现免费观看毛片| 色视频www国产| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 国产精品.久久久| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 美女国产视频在线观看| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 深夜a级毛片| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 免费观看性生交大片5| 99热网站在线观看| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 久久久久久久久中文| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 全区人妻精品视频| 国产精品无大码| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片 精品乱码久久久久久99久播 | 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 91av网一区二区| 国产成人91sexporn| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 午夜精品在线福利| 国产一级毛片在线| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 身体一侧抽搐| 有码 亚洲区| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 久久精品91蜜桃| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| videos熟女内射| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 精品国产三级普通话版| 九色成人免费人妻av| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 99热全是精品| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 精品国产三级普通话版| or卡值多少钱| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 禁无遮挡网站| 99久久人妻综合| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 久久热精品热| 亚州av有码| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 午夜激情欧美在线| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| av在线观看视频网站免费| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 成人无遮挡网站| 老司机福利观看| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 1000部很黄的大片| 美女国产视频在线观看| 亚洲av熟女| 美女高潮的动态| 久久久欧美国产精品| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 干丝袜人妻中文字幕| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 免费看a级黄色片| 亚洲av福利一区| 亚洲综合精品二区| 99热这里只有精品一区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 久久久国产成人免费| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| www日本黄色视频网| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 国产在视频线精品| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 搞女人的毛片| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 一级毛片电影观看 | 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 有码 亚洲区| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 国产免费男女视频| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 国产精品永久免费网站| 在线a可以看的网站| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 国内精品宾馆在线| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花 | 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 久久99精品国语久久久| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 国产美女午夜福利| 看黄色毛片网站| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| av黄色大香蕉| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 久久久久久伊人网av| 精品久久久久久久末码| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| av天堂中文字幕网| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 国产三级中文精品| 欧美性感艳星| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 青春草国产在线视频| 永久网站在线| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 插逼视频在线观看| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄 | 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 国产成人freesex在线| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 国产单亲对白刺激| 少妇高潮的动态图| 久久久久久伊人网av| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 老女人水多毛片| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看 | 国产精品一及| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 在线播放无遮挡| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 69av精品久久久久久| 久久人妻av系列| 1000部很黄的大片| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 午夜福利视频1000在线观看| av在线老鸭窝| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 搞女人的毛片| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 国产乱人视频| 我要搜黄色片| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 久久99精品国语久久久| 久久久久久久久大av| 亚洲av.av天堂| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 69av精品久久久久久| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 久久久色成人| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 免费av毛片视频| 久久久久久久久久成人| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 欧美潮喷喷水| 精品人妻视频免费看| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生 | 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 只有这里有精品99| 精品久久久久久久末码| 免费观看精品视频网站| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| a级毛色黄片| 看免费成人av毛片| 国产精品一及| 热99re8久久精品国产| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 精品一区二区免费观看| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 少妇的逼好多水| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 三级经典国产精品| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 久久久久久久久久久丰满| 国产极品天堂在线| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 亚洲av.av天堂| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区 | 中文资源天堂在线| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 国产成人aa在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜 | 老司机影院毛片| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 国产av在哪里看| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 美女黄网站色视频| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 久久6这里有精品| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 久久久久久大精品| 观看免费一级毛片| 永久网站在线| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 午夜免费激情av| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 小说图片视频综合网站| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 老女人水多毛片| 成人三级黄色视频| 国产真实乱freesex| 亚洲成色77777| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久 | 国产黄片美女视频| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 午夜a级毛片| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 国产成人91sexporn| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 男女国产视频网站| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 成人国产麻豆网| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 一本久久精品| 女人久久www免费人成看片 | 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 国产极品天堂在线| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| av在线天堂中文字幕| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 亚洲18禁久久av| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 国产av在哪里看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| av在线观看视频网站免费| 如何舔出高潮| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄 | 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 99久久精品热视频| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 色5月婷婷丁香| 欧美zozozo另类| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 午夜日本视频在线| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| www.色视频.com| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 舔av片在线| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 看免费成人av毛片| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| av在线亚洲专区| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 在线观看66精品国产| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 岛国毛片在线播放| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 精品酒店卫生间| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 看免费成人av毛片| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 欧美成人a在线观看| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 九九在线视频观看精品| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 国产精华一区二区三区| 天堂中文最新版在线下载 | 插阴视频在线观看视频| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 小说图片视频综合网站| 嫩草影院入口| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 有码 亚洲区|