Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials

Autores/as

  • Eduardo T.H. De Moura Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Eduardo G.H. De Moura Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Wanderley Bernardo Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Spencer Cheng Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Andre Kondo Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Diogo T.H. De Moura Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Jose Bravo Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Everson L.A. Artifon Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47892/rgp.2016.364.55

Palabras clave:

Catheterization, Cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde, Pancreatitis, Meta-analysis

Resumen

Objective: Through this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to clarify the differences between these two techniques, thus improving primary success cannulation and reducing complications during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, primarily pancreatitis. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to search for data available up until June2015from the most important databases available in the health field: EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane, LILACS and CENTRAL (via BVS), SCOPUS, the CAPES database (Brazil), and gray literature. Results: Nine randomized clinical trialsincluding2583 people were selected from20,198 studies for meta-analysis. Choledocholithiasis had been diagnosed in mostly (63.8%) of the patients, who were aged an average of 63.15 years. In those patients treated using the guide wire-assisted cannulation technique, provided a significantly lower instance of pancreatitis (RD=0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.05; I2= 45%) and greater primary success cannulation (RD=0.07; 95% CI: 0.03-0.12; I2=12%) than conventional contrast cannulation. Conclusions: The guide wire-assisted technique, when compared to the conventional contrast technique, reduces the risk of pancreatitis and increases primary success cannulation rate. Thus, guide wire-assisted cannulation appears to be the most appropriate first-line cannulation technique.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Descargas

Publicado

09.01.2017

Cómo citar

1.
De Moura ET, De Moura EG, Bernardo W, Cheng S, Kondo A, De Moura DT, Bravo J, Artifon EL. Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials. Rev Gastroenterol Peru [nternet]. 9 de enero de 2017 [citado 24 de diciembre de 2024];36(4):308-19. isponible en: https://revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55

Número

Sección

ARTÍCULOS ORIGINALES

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a

1 2 > >>