...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of analytical research in clinical medicine. >Comparison of the therapeutic methods (pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic) on prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparison of the therapeutic methods (pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic) on prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:治疗方法(药理和非武装态)预防ERCP后胰腺炎的比较:系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文

摘要

Background: Pancreatitis is considered as the most prevalent serious disorders of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Different approaches have been suggested to prevent or reduce this complication. Therefore we aim to investigate them in the current study. This systematic review was performed in 2019 using Pubmed, Embase, google scholar and Cochrane library. Two reviewers selected eligible studies and outcomes of interest were extracted. Meta-analysis was done by using the random or fixed-effect models. I-square statistic test was used for heterogeneity analysis. Material and Methods: Totally, 2758 articles were searched. Thereafter duplicated and irrelevant articles were excluded, and six articles were entered to the present study. Six RCTs were considered eligible with a total participants of 1685. Results: The relative risk of PEP was not significantly different in NSAID and hydration groups (Pooled RR=1.19, 95%CI: 0.40 to 3.50, P-value=0.74). The random effect model indicated no significant differences between NSAID and NSAID hydration groups regarding the incidence of PEP (Pooled RR=2.19, 95%CI: 0.70 to 6.88, P-value=0.17). Conclusion: Additionally, the results of one study showed that rectal indomethacin alone appeared to be more effective for preventing PEP than no prophylaxis, PSP alone, and the combination of indomethacin and PSP. Using NSAIDs alone or the combination of NSAIDs and hydration can reduce the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Lack of studies comparing different approaches of prophylaxis in post-ERCP patient or the reporting of different parameters among the existing studies seriously limited the possibility and quality of meta-analysis. Further well-designed studies with accurate reporting of data is necessary to provide more reliable conclusion.
机译:背景:胰腺炎被认为是内窥镜逆行胆管痴呆(ERCP)最普遍的严重障碍。已经提出了不同的方法来预防或减少这种并发症。因此,我们的目标是在目前的研究中调查它们。此系统审查是在2019年使用PubMed,Embase,Google Scholar和Cochrane图书馆进行的。两项审稿人选择了符合条件的研究和兴趣结果。通过使用随机或固定效果模型来完成META分析。 I-Square统计测试用于异质性分析。材料和方法:完全,搜查了2758篇文章。此后被排除了重复和无关的物品,并向本研究进入六种物品。六个RCT被认为是1685年的总参与者的条件。结果:NSAID和水合组PEP的相对风险没有显着差异(汇集RR = 1.19,95%CI:0.40至3.50,P值= 0.74)。随机效果模型表明,NSAID和NSAID水化基团关于PEP的发生率之间没有显着差异(汇集RR = 2.19,95%CI:0.70至6.88,P值= 0.17)。结论:另外,一项研究的结果表明,单独的直肠吲哚美辛似乎对预防PEP不能单独预防PEP,以及吲哚美辛和PSP的组合。单独使用NSAID或NSAID和水合的组合可以降低ERCP后胰腺炎的风险。在ERCP后患者中缺乏研究比较预防患者的不同方法或现有研究中不同参数的报告严重限制了META分析的可能性和质量。通过准确地报告数据的进一步设计的研究是提供更可靠的结论所必需的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号