4.3 Article

Combinatorial Effect of Prophylactic Interventions for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis among Patients with Risk Factors: A Network Meta-Analysis

期刊

GUT AND LIVER
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 814-824

出版社

EDITORIAL OFFICE GUT & LIVER
DOI: 10.5009/gnl220268

关键词

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Pancreatitis; Prophylaxis; Non steroidal anti-inflammatory agent; Stent

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This network meta-analysis examined the efficacy of various prophylactic strategies for reducing the risk of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) in patients with risk factors. The results showed that combination prophylactic methods were more effective in preventing PEP compared to no prophylaxis or active control. The ABC combination strategy was found to be the most effective in reducing the risk of PEP.
Background/Aims: The combinatorial effects of prophylactic methods for postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) in patients with risk factors remain unclear. In this network meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy of various prophylactic strategies to decrease the risk of PEP among patients with risk factors.Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through July 2021. We used frequentist network meta-analysis to compare the rates of PEP among patients who received prophylactic treatments as follows: class A, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; class B, prophylactic pancreatic stent; class C, aggressive hydration; or control, no prophylaxis or active control. We selected those studies that included patients with risk factors for PEP.Results: We identified 19 trials, comprising 4,328 participants. Class ABC (odds ratio [OR], 0.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 0.24), class AC (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.47), class AB (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.26), class BC (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.41), class A (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.50), and class B (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.46), were associated with a reduced risk of PEP as compared to that of the control. The most effective prophylaxis was ABC (0.87), followed by AC (0.68), AB (0.65), BC (0.56), A (0.49), and B (0.24) according to P-score.Conclusions: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that the more prophylactic methods are employed, the better the outcomes. It appears that for patients with risk factors, we need to prevent PEP through the use of these well proven combination strategies. (Gut Liver, Published online December 13, 2022)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据