Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Efficacy of endoscopic interventions versus surgery for pain management in patients with chronic calcific pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Efficacy of endoscopic interventions versus surgery for pain management in patients with chronic calcific pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Efficacy of endoscopic interventions versus surgery for pain management in patients with chronic calcific pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Efficacy of endoscopic interventions versus surgery for pain management in patients with chronic calcific pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2024
Overview
IntroductionChronic calcific pancreatitis (CCP) is a debilitating inflammatory condition characterized by the accumulation of calcific deposits in the pancreatic tissue, leading to chronic abdominal pain and functional insufficiencies. This study aims to systematically review and meta-analyse comparative studies assessing the efficacy of endotherapy versus surgery in managing CCP-related pain.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library (CENTRAL and CDSR), from inception to October 2023, were searched. The inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRS), and cohort studies comparing endoscopic interventions to surgery for pain management in patients with CCP. Pain relief, procedural technical success, and procedural-related complications were the outcomes of interest. Two review authors (CN, KK) independently assessed study eligibility criteria and performed data extraction. Using a random-effects model, pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The level of certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.ResultsFive studies were included. For the outcome of pain relief, a meta-analysis of five studies (3 RCTs and 2 cohort studies) demonstrated a significant therapeutic effect in favour of surgery with an OR of 2.36 (95% CI: 1.12 to 5.00, I2 = 41.70), with moderate level of certainty of evidence. In the analysis of five studies (3 RCTs, 1 NRS and 2 cohort studies), procedural technical success was comparable between the two groups (OR of 3.02, 95% CI: 0.47 to 19.59, I2 = 79.27%) as were adverse events (OR 1.31, 95% CI: 0.47 to 3.70, I2 = 50.93%).ConclusionIn conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that surgery may be more effective in relieving pain in patients with CCP compared to endoscopic interventions. Disease stage may be important to determine the appropriateness of each procedure.PROSPERO (CRD42023476153)
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
