• <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.

    欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 俺也久久电影网| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 嫩草影院入口| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 美女大奶头视频| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 99热精品在线国产| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 露出奶头的视频| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 九九在线视频观看精品| 欧美色视频一区免费| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 热99re8久久精品国产| 99热精品在线国产| 日本五十路高清| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 日日夜夜操网爽| 久久久久久久久久成人| 成人国产综合亚洲| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 日本黄大片高清| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 久久精品人妻少妇| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 日韩中字成人| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 亚洲综合色惰| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 国产三级黄色录像| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 日本 欧美在线| 直男gayav资源| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 18禁黄网站禁片免费观看直播| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 午夜激情欧美在线| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 黄色女人牲交| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 精品久久久久久久久av| 国产亚洲欧美98| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 国产不卡一卡二| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 在线观看66精品国产| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 日本三级黄在线观看| 99热这里只有精品一区| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 一级黄片播放器| 91狼人影院| www日本黄色视频网| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 天堂动漫精品| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 在线a可以看的网站| 88av欧美| bbb黄色大片| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 香蕉av资源在线| 午夜精品在线福利| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 午夜免费激情av| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 免费在线观看成人毛片| 亚洲经典国产精华液单 | 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕 | 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 日本免费a在线| 如何舔出高潮| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 日韩av在线大香蕉| 日韩欧美免费精品| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 久9热在线精品视频| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 国产高清三级在线| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 悠悠久久av| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 日韩高清综合在线| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 色播亚洲综合网| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 在线播放无遮挡| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| av在线蜜桃| 欧美性感艳星| 亚洲在线观看片| av天堂在线播放| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 脱女人内裤的视频| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 久久久色成人| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 天堂动漫精品| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 在线观看一区二区三区| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 我要搜黄色片| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区 | 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 久久性视频一级片| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 一本精品99久久精品77| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 青草久久国产| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 日韩欧美免费精品| 赤兔流量卡办理| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 国产精品永久免费网站| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 日本一二三区视频观看| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 亚洲最大成人av| 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 18+在线观看网站| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 久久精品91蜜桃| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 午夜影院日韩av| 久久九九热精品免费| 内射极品少妇av片p| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 久久久久九九精品影院| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 久久中文看片网| 麻豆av噜噜一区二区三区| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 免费大片18禁| 99热这里只有精品一区| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 在线播放国产精品三级| 少妇的逼水好多| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 美女高潮的动态| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片 | 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 亚洲片人在线观看| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 老女人水多毛片| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 成年免费大片在线观看| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 日本一二三区视频观看| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 国产成人aa在线观看| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 久久伊人香网站| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 欧美成人a在线观看| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 天堂动漫精品| 亚洲在线观看片| 亚洲片人在线观看| 99热这里只有精品一区| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 国产精品久久视频播放| 黄色日韩在线| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 久久草成人影院| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 一区二区三区四区激情视频 | 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 精品国产三级普通话版| 免费看日本二区| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 很黄的视频免费| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 一本久久中文字幕| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久 | 身体一侧抽搐| 青草久久国产| av在线蜜桃| 久久性视频一级片| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| av福利片在线观看| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 在线观看66精品国产| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 特级一级黄色大片| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 国产午夜精品论理片| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 97超视频在线观看视频| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 在线播放无遮挡| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 一个人免费在线观看电影| 18+在线观看网站| a级毛片a级免费在线| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 搞女人的毛片| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 国产黄片美女视频| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 在现免费观看毛片| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 日韩免费av在线播放| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 性欧美人与动物交配| 日本与韩国留学比较| 成年免费大片在线观看| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 在线观看一区二区三区| av黄色大香蕉| 十八禁网站免费在线| 久久久精品大字幕| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 一本综合久久免费| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 国产黄片美女视频| 日本一二三区视频观看| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 此物有八面人人有两片| 色视频www国产| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 九色国产91popny在线| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站 | 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 亚洲无线观看免费| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 全区人妻精品视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 两个人的视频大全免费| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| av在线观看视频网站免费| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 深夜a级毛片| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 91在线观看av| www.色视频.com| 91麻豆av在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| av专区在线播放| 国产三级中文精品| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 少妇丰满av| 久久性视频一级片| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 国产av不卡久久| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 午夜福利高清视频| 久久久色成人| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 天堂动漫精品| 国产精品,欧美在线| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 变态另类丝袜制服| 久久久精品大字幕| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 精品人妻视频免费看| 国产日本99.免费观看| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 黄色日韩在线| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 国产三级黄色录像| 成人欧美大片| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 级片在线观看| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 免费看日本二区| 男女那种视频在线观看| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 97热精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产视频内射| 久久久久久久久大av| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站 | 亚洲18禁久久av| 18+在线观看网站| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 一进一出抽搐动态| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 午夜久久久久精精品| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 婷婷亚洲欧美| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 91av网一区二区| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 中国美女看黄片| 亚洲 国产 在线| 一级av片app| 99热只有精品国产| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 97热精品久久久久久| 91字幕亚洲| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 十八禁网站免费在线| 一本综合久久免费| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 色哟哟·www| 成人国产综合亚洲| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 丰满的人妻完整版| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 嫩草影院入口| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 在线a可以看的网站| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 男女那种视频在线观看| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | av国产免费在线观看| 国内精品久久久久精免费| av视频在线观看入口| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区 | 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 国产三级黄色录像| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 国产视频内射| 精品午夜福利在线看| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 欧美bdsm另类| 国产精品野战在线观看| 嫩草影院入口| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 老女人水多毛片| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 一本久久中文字幕| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 精品久久久久久,| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 色在线成人网| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 午夜影院日韩av| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 久久精品影院6| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区 | 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 国产综合懂色| 国产av不卡久久| 欧美+日韩+精品| a在线观看视频网站| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区 | 老司机福利观看| eeuss影院久久| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 成人精品一区二区免费| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 在线a可以看的网站| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 国产精品永久免费网站| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 少妇的逼水好多| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 亚洲成人久久性| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 97碰自拍视频| 国产单亲对白刺激| 亚洲av.av天堂| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 黄色日韩在线| 成人av在线播放网站| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 色综合站精品国产| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 成人无遮挡网站| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看|