Aziz Muhammad, Iqbal Amna, Ahmed Zohaib, Saleem Saad, Lee-Smith Wade, Goyal Hemant, Kamal Faisal, Alastal Yaseen, Nawras Ali, Adler Douglas G
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, United States.
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, United States.
Endosc Int Open. 2022 Jul 15;10(7):E990-E997. doi: 10.1055/a-1834-7101. eCollection 2022 Jul.
The impact of guidewire caliber on endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP) outcomes are not clear. Recent studies have compared two guidewires, 0.035- and 0.025-inch, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs to assess if different caliber would change the outcomes in ERCP. A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, SciELO, Global Index Medicus and Web of Science was undertaken through November 23, 2021 to identify relevant RCTs comparing the two guidewires. Binary variables were compared using random effects model and DerSimonian-Laird approach. For each outcome, risk-ratio (RR), 95 % confidence interval (CI), and values were generated. < 0.05 was considered significant. Three RCTs with 1079 patients (556 in the 0.035-inch group and 523 in the 0.025-inch group) were included. The primary biliary cannulation was similar in both groups (RR: 1.02, CI: 0.96-1.08, = 0.60). The overall rates of PEP were also similar between the two groups (RR: 1.15, CI: 0.73-1.81, = 0.56). Other outcomes (overall cannulation rate, cholangitis, perforation, bleeding, use of adjunct techniques) were also comparable. The results of our analysis did not demonstrate a clear benefit of using one guidewire over other. The endoscopist should consider using the guidewire based on his technical skills and convenience.
导丝管径对内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)结果的影响尚不清楚。最近的研究在随机对照试验(RCT)中比较了两种导丝,即0.035英寸和0.025英寸的导丝。我们对现有RCT进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估不同管径是否会改变ERCP的结果。通过对PubMed/Medline、Embase、Cochrane、SciELO、全球医学索引和科学网进行系统检索,截至2021年11月23日,以确定比较这两种导丝的相关RCT。使用随机效应模型和DerSimonian-Laird方法比较二元变量。对于每个结果,生成风险比(RR)、95%置信区间(CI)和P值。P<0.05被认为具有显著性。纳入了三项RCT,共1079例患者(0.035英寸组556例,0.025英寸组523例)。两组的初次胆管插管情况相似(RR:1.02,CI:0.96-1.08,P=0.60)。两组的PEP总发生率也相似(RR:1.15,CI:0.73-1.81,P=0.56)。其他结果(总体插管率、胆管炎、穿孔、出血、辅助技术的使用)也具有可比性。我们的分析结果并未表明使用一种导丝比另一种导丝有明显优势。内镜医师应根据其技术水平和便利性来考虑使用导丝。