Endoscopic versus percutaneous management for symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Khan Muhammad1,Hammad Tariq2,Khan Zubair3,Lee Wade4,Gaidhane Monica5,Tyberg Amy5,Kahaleh Michel5

Affiliation:

1. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA

2. Division of Gastroenterology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

3. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA

4. Mulford and Carlson Libraries, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA

5. Department of Medicine – Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital

Abstract

Abstract Background Symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are managed by surgical, percutaneous, or endoscopic drainage. Due to morbidity associated with surgical drainage, percutaneous and/or endoscopic options have increasingly been used as initial management. Aims We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of endoscopic versus percutaneous drainage for management of PFCs. Methods We searched several databases from inception through 31 August 2017 to identify comparative studies using endoscopic or percutaneous drainage for PFCs. Our primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success, adverse events (AE), rates of recurrence, requirement for subsequent procedures, and length of stay in hospital. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and mean difference (MD) were calculated for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Results Seven studies with 490 patients were included in the final analysis. Pooled RR for clinical success was 0.40 (0.26, 0.61), I 2 = 42 % in favor of endoscopic management. On sensitivity analysis, after excluding one study on patients with walled-off necrosis (WON), the clinical success was 0.43 (0.28, 0.66) with no heterogeneity. Pooled RR for technical success was 1.50 (0.52, 4.37) with no heterogeneity. Pooled RR for AE and rate of recurrence were 0.77 (0.46, 1.28) and 0.60 (0.29, 1.24), respectively. Pooled MD for length of stay in hospital and rate of re-intervention were – 8.97 (– 12.88, – 5.07) and – 0.66 (– 0.93, – 0.38), respectively, in favor of endoscopic drainage. Conclusions Endoscopic drainage should be the preferred therapeutic modality for PFCs compared to percutaneous drainage as it is associated with significantly better clinical success, a lower re-intervention rate, and a shorter hospital length of stay.This study was presented as an abstract at Digestive Disease Week 2017 in Chicago, USA.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3