Comparison between different advanced cannulation techniques for difficult biliary cannulation: a systematic review with a meta-analysis.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the double-guidewire technique along with other methods (persistent standard cannulation techniques, transpancreatic sphincterotomy, and pancreatic stent-assisted technique) for difficult biliary cannulation.
METHODS
Two researchers searched for literature on the efficacy and safety of the double-guidewire technique and other techniques in difficult biliary cannulation in databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The success rate of cannulation, duration of cannulation, post-ERCP pancreatitis, and overall postoperative complications were also analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS
In total, 20 randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies involving 2008 participants were identified. The success rate of cannulation in the double-guidewire technique was much higher than that in persistent standard cannulation techniques [RR = 1.37, 95%CI (1.05, 1.79), p = 0.02]. However, it was lower than the success rate observed with transpancreatic sphincterotomy [RR = 0.89, 95%CI (0.81, 0.97), p = 0.01]. There was no significance in post-ERCP pancreatitis [RR = 1.09, 95% CI (0.85, 1.40), p = 0.49], overall postoperative complications [RR = 0.90, 95% CI (0.56, 1.45), p = 0.66], and duration of cannulation [SMD = -0.14, 95%C I (-1.43, 1.15), p = 0.83] between the double-guidewire technique and other techniques.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrated that the success rate of cannulation ranged from transpancreatic sphincterotomy to the double-guidewire technique and then to persistent standard cannulation techniques.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.