Rectal indomethacin with topical epinephrine versus indomethacin alone for preventing Post-ERCP pancreatitis - A systematic review and meta-analysis.


Journal

Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.]
ISSN: 1424-3911
Titre abrégé: Pancreatology
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 100966936

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Historique:
received: 01 12 2019
revised: 04 02 2020
accepted: 08 02 2020
pubmed: 29 2 2020
medline: 27 2 2021
entrez: 29 2 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Recent studies have compared the utility of rectal indomethacin with topical epinephrine (IE) sprayed on duodenal papilla and rectal indomethacin alone (IS) to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) with conflicting results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefit of using the combination prophylaxis as oppose to rectal indomethacin alone. The following database were searched for our systematic review: PubMed∖Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. We included both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. Primary outcome was incidence of PEP and secondary outcomes were adverse events and mortality. A total of 3 studies (all RCTs) with 2244 patients (1132 in IS and 1112 in IE group) were included. The IE group did not demonstrate any significant benefit over IS group in preventing PEP (RR: 1.15, 95% CI 0.62-2.2), mortality (RR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.22-3.24) or overall adverse events (RR: 1.3, 95% CI 0.93-1.7). The combination of rectal indomethacin and topical epinephrine failed to demonstrate any benefit over indomethacin alone in preventing PEP, decreasing mortality and overall adverse events.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Recent studies have compared the utility of rectal indomethacin with topical epinephrine (IE) sprayed on duodenal papilla and rectal indomethacin alone (IS) to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) with conflicting results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefit of using the combination prophylaxis as oppose to rectal indomethacin alone.
METHODS METHODS
The following database were searched for our systematic review: PubMed∖Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. We included both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. Primary outcome was incidence of PEP and secondary outcomes were adverse events and mortality.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 3 studies (all RCTs) with 2244 patients (1132 in IS and 1112 in IE group) were included. The IE group did not demonstrate any significant benefit over IS group in preventing PEP (RR: 1.15, 95% CI 0.62-2.2), mortality (RR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.22-3.24) or overall adverse events (RR: 1.3, 95% CI 0.93-1.7).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The combination of rectal indomethacin and topical epinephrine failed to demonstrate any benefit over indomethacin alone in preventing PEP, decreasing mortality and overall adverse events.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32107191
pii: S1424-3903(20)30039-9
doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2020.02.003
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal 0
Vasoconstrictor Agents 0
Indomethacin XXE1CET956
Epinephrine YKH834O4BH

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

356-361

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. No human subjects/animals were involved in this systematic review and meta-analysis. No funding was received for the preparation of this manuscript.

Auteurs

Muhammad Aziz (M)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: marajani@hotmail.com.

Marcel Ghanim (M)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Marcel.ghanim@utoledo.edu.

Taha Sheikh (T)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: taha.sheikh@utoledo.edu.

Sachit Sharma (S)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Sachit.sharma@utoledo.edu.

Sami Ghazaleh (S)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Sami.ghazaleh@utoledo.edu.

Rawish Fatima (R)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Rawish.f@gmail.com.

Zubair Khan (Z)

Department of Gastroenterology, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 6431 Fannin St, Houston, TX, 77030, United States. Electronic address: Zubair.khan@uth.tmc.edu.

Wade Lee-Smith (W)

University of Toledo Libraries, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Wade.lee@utoledo.edu.

Ali Nawras (A)

Department of Gastroenterology, University of Toledo Medical Center, 3000 Arlington Ave, Toledo, OH, 43614, United States. Electronic address: Ali.nawras@utoledo.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH