We have located links that may give you full text access.
Trainee Involvement and ERCP Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Digestive Diseases and Sciences 2024 May 8
BACKGROUND: Therapeutic endoscopy and gastroenterology fellows often participate in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during their training period. However, it is generally feared that trainee involvement may increase ERCP-related complications, mainly because of the side-viewing nature of the endoscope and the higher risk of pancreatic duct cannulation. There is no concrete evidence to support this notion. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the resultsof trainee participation on adverse events related to ERCP.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 31 May 2023 for studies evaluating the ERCP outcomes defined as success rates, procedure time, failed attempts, and adverse events with and without trainee participation. A random effect model was used to perform the meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the final analysis, including 17,088 ERCPs. The pooled odds ratio (pOR) of success rate, incomplete/failed attempts in the trainee and no trainee groups were 0.466 (95% CI 0.13 to 1.66, I2 = 97.8%, p = 0.239) and 3.2 (95% CI 0.70 to 14.55), I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.134), respectively. The pOR of post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding in the trainee vs. no trainee groups was 0.97 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.23, I2 = 0%, p = 0.78) and 1.3 (95% CI 0.59 to 2.83, I2 = 49%, p = 0.54). The pOR of all adverse events in both groups was 1.028 (95% CI 0.917 to 1.152, I2 = 0%, p = 0.636). Surprisingly, the pooled std mean difference for the procedure time was 0.217 (95% - 0.093 to 0.05, I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.17).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis comprising of 17,088 ERCPs in seven studies demonstrated comparable ERCP outcomes related to trainee participation regarding success rates, procedure time, and adverse events. Trainees' involvement in ERCP within a proper teaching setting appears safe and does not compromise the overall procedure's success.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 31 May 2023 for studies evaluating the ERCP outcomes defined as success rates, procedure time, failed attempts, and adverse events with and without trainee participation. A random effect model was used to perform the meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the final analysis, including 17,088 ERCPs. The pooled odds ratio (pOR) of success rate, incomplete/failed attempts in the trainee and no trainee groups were 0.466 (95% CI 0.13 to 1.66, I2 = 97.8%, p = 0.239) and 3.2 (95% CI 0.70 to 14.55), I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.134), respectively. The pOR of post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding in the trainee vs. no trainee groups was 0.97 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.23, I2 = 0%, p = 0.78) and 1.3 (95% CI 0.59 to 2.83, I2 = 49%, p = 0.54). The pOR of all adverse events in both groups was 1.028 (95% CI 0.917 to 1.152, I2 = 0%, p = 0.636). Surprisingly, the pooled std mean difference for the procedure time was 0.217 (95% - 0.093 to 0.05, I2 = 98.5%, p = 0.17).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis comprising of 17,088 ERCPs in seven studies demonstrated comparable ERCP outcomes related to trainee participation regarding success rates, procedure time, and adverse events. Trainees' involvement in ERCP within a proper teaching setting appears safe and does not compromise the overall procedure's success.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Obesity pharmacotherapy in older adults: a narrative review of evidence.International Journal of Obesity 2024 May 7
SGLT2 Inhibitors in Kidney Diseases-A Narrative Review.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 May 2
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
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