Literature DB >> 29225082

Comparison of EUS with MRCP in idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jianhua Wan1, Yaobin Ouyang1, Chen Yu2, Xiaoyu Yang1, Liang Xia1, Nonghua Lu1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) poses a diagnostic challenge for gastroenterologists, because confirmation of the disease etiology has important implications for the selection of the best possible treatment and the prevention of possible recurrence or the development of chronic pancreatitis (CP). ERCP, EUS, and MRCP typically are used to diagnose IAP when conventional radiologic methods fail. However, their exact role in the diagnosis of IAP has not yet been determined.
METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Cochrane Library (including CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases from inception to April 2017. Studies involving the use of EUS and/or MRCP for the etiologic diagnosis of IAP were included. A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager Version 5.2 for comparative studies and R software 3.3.3 to determine diagnostic yield of the studies.
RESULTS: Among the 34 studies that met the inclusion criteria (n = 2338), 7 studies used a combination of EUS and MRCP and totaled 249 patients. The results comparing EUS with MRCP showed a diagnostic yield of 153 of the 239 patients (64%) in the EUS group, which was higher than the yield of 82 of 238 patients (34%) in the MRCP group (P < .001) in the 7 studies, and the diagnostic yield was 60% in the EUS group, 24% in the MRCP group, and 43% in the MRCP after secretin stimulation (S-MRCP) group. In our subgroup analysis of CP and biliary disease, EUS was superior to MRCP (P < .001), but when comparing the efficacy of the modalities in the diagnosis of pancreatic divisum, S-MRCP was obviously superior to MRCP and EUS (12% vs 2% vs 2%).
CONCLUSION: EUS and MRCP should both be used in the diagnostic work-up of IAP as complementary techniques. EUS had a higher diagnostic accuracy than MRCP (64% vs 34%) in the etiologic diagnosis of IAP and should be preferred for establishing a possible biliary disease and CP diagnosis, whereas S-MRCP was superior to EUS and MRCP in diagnosing a possible anatomic alteration in the biliopancreatic duct system, such as pancreatic divisum.
Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29225082     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.11.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  12 in total

Review 1.  Identification and management of pancreas divisum.

Authors:  Aditya Gutta; Evan Fogel; Stuart Sherman
Journal:  Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 3.869

Review 2.  Idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a review on etiology and diagnostic work-up.

Authors:  Giovanna Del Vecchio Blanco; Cristina Gesuale; Marzia Varanese; Giovanni Monteleone; Omero Alessandro Paoluzi
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-04-30

Review 3.  [Interventional endoscopic treatment in acute pancreatitis].

Authors:  Marcus Hollenbach; Jürgen Feisthammel; Albrecht Hoffmeister
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 0.743

4.  Exploring the Optimal Timing of Endoscopic Ultrasound Performance Post-Acute Idiopathic Pancreatitis.

Authors:  Tawfik Khoury; Amir Shahin; Wisam Sbeit
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-27

5.  Idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a single-center investigation of clinical and biochemical features.

Authors:  Giovanna Del Vecchio Blanco; Cristina Gesuale; Diana Giannarelli; Marzia Varanese; Diego Fiume; Giovanni Monteleone; Omero Alessandro Paoluzi
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 3.397

6.  Searching practices and inclusion of unpublished studies in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Daniël A Korevaar; Jean-Paul Salameh; Yasaman Vali; Jérémie F Cohen; Matthew D F McInnes; René Spijker; Patrick M Bossuyt
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 5.273

7.  Recurrence of idiopathic acute pancreatitis after cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  D S Umans; N D Hallensleben; R C Verdonk; S A W Bouwense; P Fockens; H C van Santvoort; R P Voermans; M G Besselink; M J Bruno; J E van Hooft
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2019-12-25       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Endoscopic management of iatrogenic EUS-related duodenal perforations with over-the-scope clips.

Authors:  Hicham El Bacha; Frederic Prat
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-01-08

9.  Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnostic work-up of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (PICUS): study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Devica S Umans; Hester C Timmerhuis; Nora D Hallensleben; Stefan A Bouwense; Marie-Paule Gf Anten; Abha Bhalla; Rina A Bijlsma; Marja A Boermeester; Menno A Brink; Lieke Hol; Marco J Bruno; Wouter L Curvers; Hendrik M van Dullemen; Brechje C van Eijck; G Willemien Erkelens; Paul Fockens; Erwin J M van Geenen; Wouter L Hazen; Chantal V Hoge; Akin Inderson; Liesbeth M Kager; Sjoerd D Kuiken; Lars E Perk; Jan-Werner Poley; Rutger Quispel; Tessa Eh Römkens; Hjalmar C van Santvoort; Adriaan Citl Tan; Annemieke Y Thijssen; Niels G Venneman; Frank P Vleggaar; Annet McJ Voorburg; Roy Lj van Wanrooij; Ben J Witteman; Robert C Verdonk; Marc G Besselink; Jeanin E van Hooft
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  The diagnostic work-up and outcomes of 'presumed' idiopathic acute pancreatitis: A post-hoc analysis of a multicentre observational cohort.

Authors:  Nora D Hallensleben; Devica S Umans; Stefan Aw Bouwense; Robert C Verdonk; Tessa Eh Romkens; Ben J Witteman; Matthijs P Schwartz; Marcel B Spanier; Robert Laheij; Hjalmar C van Santvoort; Marc G Besselink; Jeanin E van Hooft; Marco J Bruno
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 4.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.