Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The efficacy of endoscopic therapy for pancreas divisum: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis assessing the efficacy and predictors of success of endoscopic therapy in the management of patients with pancreas divisum.

METHODS: An electronic database search (PubMed and ScienceDirect) was performed for relevant studies. Studies were selected based on predefined criteria and data were extracted on patient population, follow up, endotherapy methods, success rates and complication rates. A random-effect model was used to pool the effect size across studies. Heterogeneity testing and publication bias assessment were performed. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of successful endoscopic therapy.

RESULTS: Of 381 articles reviewed, 23 studies with 874 patients met the inclusion criteria. All were case series with suboptimal quality. Endoscopic therapy included minor papilla sphincterotomy, minor papilla sphincteroplasty and dorsal duct stenting. Mean follow-up duration was 37 months. The rate of "improvement" as defined by authors after endoscopic therapy varied significantly across studies, ranging from 31-96%: 589/874 patients were reported to have improved, corresponding to a pooled efficacy rate of 67.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.610-0.734; P=0.0001). The pooled rate of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was 10.1% (95%CI 0.084-0.124; 2-sided P=0.0001). On subgroup analysis, patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis had better endoscopic outcomes (pooled efficacy rate 76%, 95%CI 0.712-0.803, P=0.0001). Dorsal duct stenting and longer follow up were the only parameters predictive of successful endotherapy. Significant heterogeneity was observed within and across studies.

CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic efficacy in pancreas divisum is estimated at 67.5%. Available studies are of poor quality with significant heterogeneity. Comparative studies with rigorous methodology are needed.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app