Endoscopic versus percutaneous drainage for pancreatic fluid collection after pancreatic surgery: An up-to-date meta-analysis and systematic review

Abstract

Summary: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUSD) and percutaneous drainage (PD) have reportedly been used for postoperative pancreatic fluid collection (PFC). However, there is limited evidence regarding safety and efficacy in a comparison of EUSD and PD for postoperative PFC. We conducted a search of the databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov, to August 2020. Studies comparing EUSD and PD for postoperative PFC were included. The outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and recurrence of PFC.We included a total of 6 studies involving 247 patients in the current study. There was no significant difference between EUSD and PD in terms of technical success (odds ratio [OR] = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29–3.12; p = 0.94) and clinical success (OR = 1.36; 95% CI: 0.68–2.72; p = 0.39). PFC recurrence and adverse events were similar between the two groups (OR = 1.82; 95% CI: 0.75–4.37; p = 0.18 and OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.31–1.92; p = 0.58, respectively).This meta-analysis confirmed that EUSD has comparable safety and efficacy to PD for postoperative PFC. Additional high-quality studies are required in the future.

Keywords

• Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage
• Percutaneous drainage
• Postoperative pancreatic collection
• Systematic review
• Meta-analysis