120
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy in patients with complete pancreas divisum and acute recurrent pancreatitis: a metanalysis

, , ORCID Icon, , , , , , & show all
Pages 225-231 | Received 19 Jun 2023, Accepted 28 Sep 2023, Published online: 05 Oct 2023
 

Abstract

Background and Aims

Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital variant of the pancreatic ductal system and a potential cause of acute recurrent pancreatitis (ARP). Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy (MiES) is the most common procedure performed in the management of PD-related ARP. The aim of this study is to perform a meta-analysis estimating the efficacy and the safety of MiES in the management of patients with PD-related ARP.

Methods

A research was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE and Web of science, the studies were reviewed and selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Evaluation of Heterogeneity and publication bias was performed, and a random effect model was used to estimate the effect size of each study.

Results

One hundred and thirteen articles were selected and reviewed, 13 met the inclusion criteria. All the studies were retrospective with a mean follow-up duration of 45.9 months. A total of 323 patients with PD-related ARP treated with MiES were included in the meta-analysis. The overall clinical success rate of MiES (defined as no further episodes of ARP, reduction of episodes of ARP, or improvement in quality of life) was of 77% (95%CI: 72%–81%; p = 0.30). Evaluating only the studies with clinical success rate defined as “no further AP in the follow-up” the clinical success rate was of 69.8% (95%CI: 61.3%–77.2%; p = 0.57), while evaluating the studies with other definitions (reduction of episodes of ARP or improvement in quality of life) the clinical success rate was of 81.2% (95%CI: 75.2%–86.1%; p = 0.45). The common fixed effects model disclosed a 25.5% overall adverse events rate (95%CI: 19.3%–32.8%; p = 0.42): acute pancreatitis in 14.3% (95%CI: 9.7%–20.6%; p = 0.36), bleeding in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%–10.4%; p = 0.98), and other adverse events in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%–10.4%; p = 0.67).

Conclusion

MiES is an effective and relatively safe treatment in the management of PD-related ARP. The retrospective nature of the studies selected is the main limitations of this metanalysis. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these data.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.