-
Cureus Nov 2023With an incidence exceeding 30%, biliary complications after pediatric liver transplantation remain a great challenge. In addition, the database includes numerous... (Review)
Review
With an incidence exceeding 30%, biliary complications after pediatric liver transplantation remain a great challenge. In addition, the database includes numerous controversial papers about the safety of duct-to-duct anastomosis compared to Reux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy for pediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We aim to compare the two techniques in pediatric LDLT by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. PUBMED, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies from 1989 to October 2022. According to our eligibility criteria, seven articles (561 pediatric LDLT) were included in our study. On one hand, DD anastomosis is associated with a higher rate of biliary stricture in comparison to RYHJ (OR: 2.47, 95% CI = 1.20-5.09, P = 0.01; I2 = 12%). On the other hand, the incidence of cholangitis was higher in RYHJ (OR: 0.10 95% CI = 0.01- 0.84, P = 0.03; I2 = 0%). However, there was no significant difference in the overall incidence of complications, leakage and mortality between the two groups (overall incidence of complication OR: 1.12, 95% CI = 0.34-3.68, P = 0.86; I2 = 62%), (Leakage OR: 2.22, 95% CI = 0.79-6.23, P = 0.13; I2 = 18%) and (Mortality OR: 2.53, 95% CI = 0.61-10.57, P = 0.30; I2 = 0%). In conclusion, with a lower incidence of cholangitis, an equal overall incidence of biliary complication, and the possibility of RY conversion in case of stricture, DD anastomosis offers a feasible, safe, and more physiological alternative to RYHJ for pediatric LDLT.
PubMed: 37920423
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48108 -
The British Journal of Surgery Oct 2023Previous studies have reported conflicting results of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis on infectious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. This study evaluated the...
BACKGROUND
Previous studies have reported conflicting results of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis on infectious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. This study evaluated the effect of prolonged antibiotics on surgical-site infections (SSIs) after pancreatoduodenectomy.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken of SSIs in patients with perioperative (within 24 h) versus prolonged antibiotic (over 24 h) prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy. SSIs were classified as organ/space infections or superficial SSI within 30 days after surgery. ORs were calculated using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.
RESULTS
Ten studies were included in the qualitative analysis, of which 8 reporting on 1170 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. The duration of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis varied between 2 and 10 days after surgery. Four studies reporting on 782 patients showed comparable organ/space infection rates in patients receiving perioperative and prolonged antibiotics (OR 1.35, 95 per cent c.i. 0.94 to 1.93). However, among patients with preoperative biliary drainage (5 studies reporting on 577 patients), organ/space infection rates were lower with prolonged compared with perioperative antibiotics (OR 2.09, 1.43 to 3.07). Three studies (633 patients) demonstrated comparable superficial SSI rates between patients receiving perioperative versus prolonged prophylaxis (OR 1.54, 0.97 to 2.44), as well as in patients with preoperative biliary drainage in 4 studies reporting on 431 patients (OR 1.60, 0.89 to 2.88).
CONCLUSION
Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with fewer organ/space infection in patients who undergo preoperative biliary drainage. However, the optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy remains to be determined and warrants confirmation in an RCT.
PubMed: 37440361
DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad213 -
Surgery Apr 2023Evaluation of morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection often lacks stratification by extent of resection or diagnosis. Although a liver resection for different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Evaluation of morbidity and mortality after hepatic resection often lacks stratification by extent of resection or diagnosis. Although a liver resection for different indications may have technical similarities, postoperative outcomes differ. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of major complications and mortality after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
METHODS
Meta-analysis was performed to assess postoperative mortality (in-hospital, 30-, and 90-day) and major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III).
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies that reported on 19,503 patients were included. Pooled in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality were 5.9% (95% confidence interval 4.1-8.4); 4.6% (95% confidence interval 4.0-5.2); and 6.1% (95% confidence interval 5.0-7.3), respectively. Pooled proportion of major complications was 22.2% (95% confidence interval 17.7-27.5) for all resections. The pooled 90-day mortality was 3.1% (95% confidence interval 1.8-5.2) for a minor resection, 7.4% (95% confidence interval 5.9-9.3) for all major resections, and 11.4% (95% confidence interval 6.9-18.7) for extended resections (P = .001). Major complications were 38.8% (95% confidence interval 29.5-49) after a major hepatectomy compared to 11.3% (95% confidence interval 5.0-24.0) after a minor hepatectomy (P = .001). Asian studies had a pooled 90-day mortality of 4.4% (95% confidence interval 3.3-5.9) compared to 6.8% (95% confidence interval 5.6-8.2) for Western studies (P = .02). Cohorts with patients included before 2000 had a pooled 90-day mortality of 5.9% (95% confidence interval 4.8-7.3) compared to 6.8% (95% confidence interval 5.1-9.1) after 2000 (P = .44).
CONCLUSION
When informing patients or comparing outcomes across hospitals, postoperative mortality rates after liver resection should be reported for 90-days with consideration of the diagnosis and the extent of liver resection.
Topics: Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Cholangiocarcinoma; Hepatectomy; Bile Duct Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic
PubMed: 36577599
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.11.027 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Dec 2016Portal biliopathy (PB) is defined as the presence of biliary abnormalities in patients with non-cirrhotic/non-neoplastic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) and... (Review)
Review
Portal biliopathy (PB) is defined as the presence of biliary abnormalities in patients with non-cirrhotic/non-neoplastic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) and portal cavernoma (PC). The pathogenesis of PB is due to compression of bile ducts by PC and/or to ischemic damage secondary to an altered biliary vascularization in EHPVO and PC. Although asymptomatic biliary abnormalities can be frequently seen by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with PC (77%-100%), only a part of these (5%-38%) are symptomatic. Clinical presentation includes jaundice, cholangitis, cholecystitis, abdominal pain, and cholelithiasis. In this subset of patients is required a specific treatment. Different therapeutic approaches aimed to diminish portal hypertension and treat biliary strictures are available. In order to decompress PC, surgical porto-systemic shunt or transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt can be performed, and treatment on the biliary stenosis includes endoscopic (Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon dilation, stone extraction, stent placement) and surgical (bilioenteric anastomosis, cholecystectomy) approaches. Definitive treatment of PB often requires multiple and combined interventions both on vascular and biliary system. Liver transplantation can be considered in patients with secondary biliary cirrhosis, recurrent cholangitis or unsuccessful control of portal hypertension.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Bile Duct Diseases; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholangiopancreatography, Magnetic Resonance; Cholangitis; Cholecystitis; Cholelithiasis; Constriction, Pathologic; Humans; Hypertension, Portal; Jaundice, Obstructive; Portal Vein; Portasystemic Shunt, Surgical; Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic
PubMed: 28018098
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i45.9909 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021The use of surgical drains is a very common practice after pancreatic surgery. The role of prophylactic abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of surgical drains is a very common practice after pancreatic surgery. The role of prophylactic abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is the third update of a previously published Cochrane Review to address the uncertain benifits of prophylactic abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of routine abdominal drainage after pancreatic surgery, compare the effects of different types of surgical drains, and evaluate the optimal time for drain removal.
SEARCH METHODS
In this updated review, we re-searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) on 08 February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage versus no drainage in people undergoing pancreatic surgery. We also included RCTs that compared different types of drains and different schedules for drain removal in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified the studies for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For all analyses, we used the random-effects model. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for important outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified a total of nine RCTs with 1892 participants. Drain use versus no drain use We included four RCTs with 1110 participants, randomised to the drainage group (N = 560) and the no drainage group (N = 550) after pancreatic surgery. Low-certainty evidence suggests that drain use may reduce 90-day mortality (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.90; two studies, 478 participants). Compared with no drain use, low-certainty evidence suggests that drain use may result in little to no difference in 30-day mortality (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.99; four studies, 1055 participants), wound infection rate (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.41; four studies, 1055 participants), length of hospital stay (MD -0.14 days, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.51; three studies, 876 participants), the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.23; four studies, 1055 participants), and quality of life (105 points versus 104 points; measured with the pancreas-specific quality of life questionnaire (scale 0 to 144, higher values indicating a better quality of life); one study, 399 participants). There was one drain-related complication in the drainage group (0.2%). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that drain use probably resulted in little to no difference in morbidity (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.13; four studies, 1055 participants). The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of drain use on intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80; four studies, 1055 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional radiological interventions for postoperative complications (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.87; three studies, 660 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Active versus passive drain We included two RCTs involving 383 participants, randomised to the active drain group (N = 194) and the passive drain group (N = 189) after pancreatic surgery. Compared with a passive drain, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect of an active drain on 30-day mortality (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.30 to 5.06; two studies, 382 participants; very low-certainty evidence), intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.66; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection rate (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.90; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), morbidity (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.77; two studies, 382 participants; very low-certainty evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -0.79 days, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.04; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.83; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no drain-related complication in either group. Early versus late drain removal We included three RCTs involving 399 participants with a low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, randomised to the early drain removal group (N = 200) and the late drain removal group (N = 199) after pancreatic surgery. Compared to late drain removal, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect of early drain removal on 30-day mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.45; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection rate (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.85; two studies, 285 participants; very low-certainty evidence), hospital costs (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.14; two studies, 258 participants; very low-certainty evidence), the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.10; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional radiological procedures for postoperative complications (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.79; one study, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found that early drain removal may reduce intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; two studies, 285 participants; very low-certainty evidence), morbidity (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; two studies, 258 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (MD -2.20 days, 95% CI -3.52 to -0.87; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence was very uncertain. None of the studies reported on drain-related complications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with no drain use, it is unclear whether routine drain use has any effect on mortality at 30 days or postoperative complications after pancreatic surgery. Compared with no drain use, low-certainty evidence suggests that routine drain use may reduce mortality at 90 days. Compared with a passive drain, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of an active drain on mortality at 30 days or postoperative complications. Compared with late drain removal, early drain removal may reduce intra-abdominal infection rate, morbidity, and length of hospital stay for people with low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, but the evidence is very uncertain.
Topics: Abdomen; Drainage; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula
PubMed: 34921395
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub5 -
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... Mar 2023Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most frequent hepatobiliary cancer after hepatocellular carcinoma with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. This study...
BACKGROUND
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most frequent hepatobiliary cancer after hepatocellular carcinoma with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. This study aimed to review existing knowledge on the genetic basis of CCA, molecular targets/signaling pathways involved in the pathogenesis, disease progression and prognosis, including potential targets for targeted therapies of CCA.
METHODS
The systematic review was performed in compliance with PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search in PubMed and Science Direct databases was performed using the following keywords: "cholangiocarcinoma", AND "molecular target" AND/OR "signaling pathway", AND/OR "targeted therapy", AND/OR "cancer chemotherapy." The eligibility criteria included: i) full-text articles published in English, ii) articles with in vitro and/or in vivo and/or clinical studies of molecular targets/signaling pathwanys related to CCA pathogenesis/disease progression/prognosis and/or targeted therapy. Seventy-three studies that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were finally included in the final data synthesis.
RESULTS
A total of 833 relevant articles published up to April 2022 were identified and 73 sttudies that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were finally included in the analysis. The molecular biomarkers and drugs targeting signalling pathways were reported. Recent research has been focused on targeting the apoptotic and cell proliferation pathways, and in addition, the angiogenesis and metastasis pathway. More effort focused on testing the efficacy of combination therapies against the cancer cell and specifically CCA. The PI3K (Phosphoinositide 3-kinases)/ERK/Akt (AKT serine/threonine kinase 1)/mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) signaling pathway and HER2 (Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) and EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) pathways are the most potential targets for CCA therapy.
CONCLUSION
The information obtained could be exploited for further development of diagnostic tools for early diagnosis of CCA, as well as effective CCA-targeted therapies.
Topics: Humans; Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt; Signal Transduction; Cholangiocarcinoma; Cell Proliferation; Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases; Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic; Bile Duct Neoplasms; Disease Progression; Cell Line, Tumor
PubMed: 36974526
DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.3.741 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2023Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD). However, its risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD). However, its risk factors are still unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to identify the potential risk factors of DGE among patients undergoing PD or PPPD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrial.gov for studies that examined the clinical risk factors of DGE after PD or PPPD from inception through 31 July 2022. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs using random-effects or fixed-effects models. We also performed heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses.
RESULTS
The study included a total of 31 research studies, which involved 9205 patients. The pooled analysis indicated that out of 16 nonsurgical-related risk factors, three risk factors were found to be associated with an increased incidence of DGE. These risk factors were older age (OR 1.37, P =0.005), preoperative biliary drainage (OR 1.34, P =0.006), and soft pancreas texture (OR 1.23, P =0.04). On the other hand, patients with dilated pancreatic duct (OR 0.59, P =0.005) had a decreased risk of DGE. Among 12 operation-related risk factors, more blood loss (OR 1.33, P =0.01), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (OR 2.09, P <0.001), intra-abdominal collection (OR 3.58, P =0.001), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 3.06, P <0.0001) were more likely to cause DGE. However, our data also revealed 20 factors did not support stimulative factors influencing DGE.
CONCLUSION
Age, preoperative biliary drainage, pancreas texture, pancreatic duct size, blood loss, POPF, intra-abdominal collection, and intra-abdominal abscess are significantly associated with DGE. This meta-analysis may have utility in guiding clinical practice for improvements in screening patients with a high risk of DGE and selecting appropriate treatment measures.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Gastroparesis; Pylorus; Pancreatic Fistula; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications; Abdominal Abscess; Gastric Emptying
PubMed: 37073540
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000418 -
Epidemiology and Health 2021Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are rare but highly fatal. Although the etiology of BTC is poorly understood, gallstones are proposed to be a major risk factor. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are rare but highly fatal. Although the etiology of BTC is poorly understood, gallstones are proposed to be a major risk factor. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the associations between gallstone characteristics and BTC risk.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases and systematically reviewed cohort and case-control studies published before April 9, 2018. All the included studies reported appropriate risk estimates and confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between the presence, size, number, or duration of gallstones and the risk of BTC, including gallbladder cancer (GBC), extrahepatic bile duct cancer (EBDC), and ampulla of Vater cancer (AOVC). Summary odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model in the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted to inspect sources of potential heterogeneity, and the Egger test was performed to assess publication bias.
RESULTS
Seven cohort studies and 23 case-control studies in Asian, European, and American populations were included. The presence of gallstones was associated with an increased risk of BTC (OR, 4.38; 95% CI, 3.23 to 5.93; I2=91.2%), GBC (OR, 7.26; 95% CI, 4.33 to 12.18), EBDC (OR, 3.17; 95% CI, 2.24 to 4.50), and AOVC (OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.33 to 8.11). Gallstone size (>1 vs. <1 cm; OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.10 to 3.22) was significantly associated with the risk of GBC.
CONCLUSIONS
Gallstone characteristics, such as presence, size, and number, are associated with an increased risk of BTC. However, significantly high heterogeneity in the meta-analyses is a limitation of this study.
Topics: Biliary Tract Neoplasms; Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Gallstones; Humans; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 33541011
DOI: 10.4178/epih.e2021011 -
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2016Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded complications are the development of a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The prediction and prevention of POPF remains an area of debate with several questions yet to be firmly addressed with solid answers.
METHODS
A systematic review of systematic reviews/meta-analyses and randomized trials in the English literature (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, EMBASE) covering January 2005 to December 2015 on risk factors and preventive strategies for POPF.
RESULTS
A total of 49 systematic reviews and meta-analyses over the past decade discussed patient, surgeon, pancreatic disease and intraoperative related factors of POPF. Non-modifiable factors (age, BMI, comorbidity) and pathology (histotype, gland texture, duct size) that indicates surgery are associated with POPF risk. Consideration of anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly modify the risk of fistula. Sealant products appear to have no effect. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion enhance risk, but is modifiable by focus on technique and training. Drains may not prevent fistulae, but may help in early detection. Early drain-amylase may aid in detection. Predictive scores lack uniform validation, but may have a role in patient information if reliable pre-operative risk factors can be obtained.
CONCLUSIONS
Development of POPF occurs through several demonstrated risk factors. Anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly decrease risk. Drains may aid in early detection of leaks, but do not prevent POPF.
Topics: Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Humans; Morbidity; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Predictive Value of Tests; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27216233
DOI: 10.3109/00365521.2016.1169317 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2022Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in surgically altered anatomy (SAA), can be challenging and the optimal technique selection remains debatable.... (Review)
Review
Comparison between Enteroscopy-, Laparoscopy- and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography in Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in surgically altered anatomy (SAA), can be challenging and the optimal technique selection remains debatable. Most common foregut interventions resulting to this burden consist of Billroth II gastrectomy, Whipple surgery and Roux-en-Y anastomoses, including gastric by-pass. This systematic review, with meta-analysis, aimed to compare the rates of successful enteroscope-assisted (EA)-, endosonography-directed transgastric- (EDGE), and laparoscopy-assisted (LA)-ERCP.
METHODS
A systematic research (Medline) was performed for relative studies, through January 2022. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as approaching the ampulla site. Secondary outcomes included the desired duct cannulation, successful therapeutic manipulations, and complication rates. We performed meta-analyses of pooled data, and subgroup analysis considering the EA-ERCP subtypes (spiral-, double and single balloon-enteroscope). Pooled rates are reported as percentages with 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CIs).
RESULTS
Seventy-six studies were included (3569 procedures). Regarding primary outcome, EA-ERCP was the least effective [87.3% (95%CI: 85.3-89.4); I: 91.0%], whereas EDGE and LA-ERCP succeeded in 97.9% (95%CI: 96.4-99.4; I: 0%) and 99.1% (95%CI: 98.6-99.7; I: 0%), respectively. Similarly, duct cannulation and therapeutic success rates were 74.7% (95%CI: 71.3-78.0; I: 86.9%) and 69.1% (95%CI: 65.3-72.9; I: 91.8%) after EA-ERCP, 98% (95%CI: 96.5-99.6; I: 0%) and 97.9% (95%CI: 96.3-99.4) after EDGE, and 98.6% (95%CI: 97.9-99.2; I: 0%) and 98.5% (95%CI: 97.8-99.2; I: 0%) after LA-ERCP, respectively. The noticed high heterogeneity in EA-ERCP results probably reflects the larger number of included studies, the different enteroscopy modalities and the variety of surgical interventions. Comparisons revealed the superiority of LA-ERCP and EDGE over EA-ERCP ( ≤ 0.001) for all success-related outcomes, though LA-ERCP and EDGE were comparable ( ≥ 0.43). ERCP with spiral-enteroscope was inferior to balloon-enteroscope, while the type of the balloon-enteroscope did not affect the results. Most adverse events were recorded after LA-ERCP [15.1% (95%CI: 9.40-20.8); I: 87.1%], and EDGE [13.1% (95%CI: 7.50-18.8); I: 48.2%], significantly differing from EA-ERCP [5.7% (95%CI: 4.50-6.80); ≤ 0.04; I: 64.2%].
CONCLUSIONS
LA-ERCP and EDGE were associated with higher technical, cannulation, and therapeutic success compared to EA-ERCP, though accompanied with more adverse events.
PubMed: 36295081
DOI: 10.3390/life12101646