Can early precut implementation reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related complication risk? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Precut papillotomy is considered a risk factor for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related complications; however whether the complication risk is due to precut itself or to the prior prolonged attempts is still debated; therefore, early precut implementation has been suggested to reduce the complication rate. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cannulation and complication rates of early precut implementation with persistent attempts by the standard approach. METHODS: RCTs that compared cannulation and complication rates of the early precut implementation and of persistent attempts by the standard approach were included. Summary effect sizes were estimated by odds ratio (OR) with a random-effects model and by Peto OR. RESULTS: Six RCTs with a total of 966 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Overall cannulation rates were 90 % in both randomization groups (OR 1.20; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.54 - 2.69). Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in 2.5 % of patients randomized to the early precut groups and in 5.3 % of patients from the persistent attempts groups (OR 0.47; 95 %CI 0.24 - 0.91). The overall complication rates, considering pancreatitis, bleeding, cholangitis, and perforation rates, were 5.0 % in the early precut groups and 6.3 % in the persistent attempts groups (OR 0.78; 95 %CI 0.44 - 1.37). CONCLUSIONS: RCTs that investigated the issue of timing of the precut procedure were limited. Current evidence suggests that in experienced hands the early implementation of precut and persistent cannulation attempts have similar overall cannulation rates; early precut implementation reduces post-ERCP pancreatitis risk but not the overall complication rate. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings

Can a wire-guided cannulation technique increase bile duct cannulation rate and prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis?: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: The most common technique used to achieve primary deep biliary cannulation is the standard contrast-assisted method. To increase the success rate and reduce the risk of complications, a wire-guided cannulation strategy has been proposed. Prospective studies provided conflicting results as to whether the wire-guided cannulation technique increases the cannulation rate and reduces post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis risk compared with the standard method. The objective of this study was to carry out a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compares primary biliary cannulation and post-ERCP pancreatitis rates with the wire-guided method and the standard cannulation technique. METHODS: Literature searches of electronic databases and online clinical trial registers up to March 2009 were conducted to identify RCTs comparing primary cannulation and post-ERCP pancreatitis rates with the wire-guided method and the standard cannulation technique. A meta-analysis of these clinical trials was performed. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included. Overall, the primary cannulation rates reported with the wire-guided cannulation technique and the standard method were 85.3 and 74.9%, respectively. The pooled analysis of all the selected studies comparing the wire-guided cannulation technique with the standard method yielded an odds ratio (OR) of 2.05 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.27-3.31). The pooled analysis comparing the post-ERCP pancreatitis rates for the wire-guided-cannulation groups with those for the standard-method groups yielded an OR of 0.23 (95% CI: 0.13-0.41). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that the wire-guided technique increases the primary cannulation rate and reduces the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared with the standard contrast-injection method. Further large, well-performed, randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings

Meta-analysis: can Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment reduce the risk for gastric cancer?

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori infection is associated with gastric cancer, but the effect of eradication treatment on gastric cancer risk is not well defined. PURPOSE: To determine whether H. pylori eradication treatment can reduce the risk for gastric cancer. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and online clinical trial registers through 31 January 2009, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials that compared eradication treatment with no treatment in H. pylori-positive patients and that assessed gastric cancer or progression of preneoplastic lesions during follow-up. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently reviewed articles and extracted data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven studies met inclusion criteria, 1 of which was excluded from pooled analysis because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. All studies were performed in areas with high incidence of gastric cancer, mostly in Asia. Overall, 37 of 3388 (1.1%) treated patients developed gastric cancer compared with 56 of 3307 (1.7%) untreated (control) participants. In a pooled analysis of 6 studies with a total of 6695 participants followed from 4 to 10 years, the relative risk for gastric cancer was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.98). LIMITATIONS: All studies but 1 were performed in Asia. Only 2 assessed gastric cancer incidence, and only 2 were double-blinded. CONCLUSION: Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment seems to reduce gastric cancer risk