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

Descripción del Articulo

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 s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: De Moura, Eduardo T.H., De Moura, Eduardo G.H., Bernardo, Wanderley, Cheng, Spencer, Kondo, Andre, De Moura, Diogo T.H., Bravo, Jose, Artifon, Everson L.A.
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2017
Institución:Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
Repositorio:Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.revistagastroperu.com:article/55
Enlace del recurso:http://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Catheterization
Cholangiopancreatography
endoscopic retrograde
Pancreatitis
Meta-analysis
id REVSGP_14dad6e89bb989d403025d2ae47aed0b
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.revistagastroperu.com:article/55
network_acronym_str REVSGP
network_name_str Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
repository_id_str .
spelling Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trialsDe Moura, Eduardo T.H.De Moura, Eduardo G.H.Bernardo, WanderleyCheng, SpencerKondo, AndreDe Moura, Diogo T.H.Bravo, JoseArtifon, Everson L.A.CatheterizationCholangiopancreatographyendoscopic retrogradePancreatitisMeta-analysisObjective: 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.Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú2017-01-09info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/5510.47892/rgp.2016.364.55Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú; 2016 Vol 36 (4); 308-191609-722X1022-5129reponame:Revista de Gastroenterología del Perúinstname:Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perúinstacron:SOCIOGASTROspahttp://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55/53Derechos de autor 2017 Revista de Gastroenterología del Perúinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:ojs.revistagastroperu.com:article/552017-01-09T19:20:59Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
title Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
spellingShingle Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
De Moura, Eduardo T.H.
Catheterization
Cholangiopancreatography
endoscopic retrograde
Pancreatitis
Meta-analysis
title_short Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
title_full Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
title_fullStr Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
title_full_unstemmed Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
title_sort Guide wire-assisted cannulation versus conventional contrast to prevent pancreatitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv De Moura, Eduardo T.H.
De Moura, Eduardo G.H.
Bernardo, Wanderley
Cheng, Spencer
Kondo, Andre
De Moura, Diogo T.H.
Bravo, Jose
Artifon, Everson L.A.
author De Moura, Eduardo T.H.
author_facet De Moura, Eduardo T.H.
De Moura, Eduardo G.H.
Bernardo, Wanderley
Cheng, Spencer
Kondo, Andre
De Moura, Diogo T.H.
Bravo, Jose
Artifon, Everson L.A.
author_role author
author2 De Moura, Eduardo G.H.
Bernardo, Wanderley
Cheng, Spencer
Kondo, Andre
De Moura, Diogo T.H.
Bravo, Jose
Artifon, Everson L.A.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Catheterization
Cholangiopancreatography
endoscopic retrograde
Pancreatitis
Meta-analysis
topic Catheterization
Cholangiopancreatography
endoscopic retrograde
Pancreatitis
Meta-analysis
description 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.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-01-09
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55
10.47892/rgp.2016.364.55
url http://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55
identifier_str_mv 10.47892/rgp.2016.364.55
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/55/53
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Derechos de autor 2017 Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Derechos de autor 2017 Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú; 2016 Vol 36 (4); 308-19
1609-722X
1022-5129
reponame:Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
instname:Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
instacron:SOCIOGASTRO
instname_str Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
instacron_str SOCIOGASTRO
institution SOCIOGASTRO
reponame_str Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
collection Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1846699726340096000
score 12.80667
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).