Prophylactic Pancreatic Stent Placement and Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Overview
Pharmacology
Radiology
Authors
Affiliations
Background And Study Aims: Pancreatitis is one of the most frequent complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The placement of a prophylactic pancreatic stent after ERCP can help prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We aimed to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis regarding pancreatic stent placement for prevention of PEP and review the immediate adverse events associated with pancreatic stent placement.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) considering pancreatic stent placement and the subsequent incidence of PEP. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of PEP. We also did a meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies that reported on immediate adverse events, in order to estimate their incidence.
Results: Eight studies, involving 680 patients, were included in the meta-analysis; 336 patients had pancreatic stent placement, and 344 patients formed the control group. Pancreatic stent placement was associated with a statistically significant reduction in PEP (relative risk [RR] 0.32, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.19 - 0.52; P<0.001). Subgroup analysis with stratification according to PEP severity showed that pancreatic stenting was beneficial in patients with mild to moderate PEP (RR 0.36, 95 %CI 0.22 -0.60; P<0.001) and in patients with severe PEP (RR 0.23, 95 %CI 0.06 - 0.91; P=0.04). Subgroup analysis according to patient selection demonstrated that pancreatic stenting was effective for both high risk and mixed-case groups. Weighted pooled estimates from between one and 17 studies for incidences of immediate adverse events were: overall complications 4.4 %; any infection 3.0 %; bleeding 2.5 %; cholangitis or cholecystitis 3.1 %; necrosis 0.4 %; pancreatic stent migration 4.9 % and occlusion 7.9 %; perforation 0.8 %; pseudocysts 3.0 %; and retroperitoneal perforation 1.2 %.
Conclusions: The meta-analysis shows that pancreatic stent placement after ERCP reduces the risk of PEP.
Ascending colon perforation by a migrated pancreatic spontaneous dislodgment stent: a case report.
Okumura M, Koga H, Eguchi H, Sato N, Utsunomiya R, Wakahara Y Clin J Gastroenterol. 2025; .
PMID: 39953361 DOI: 10.1007/s12328-025-02101-6.
Chen Z, Fu H Turk J Gastroenterol. 2024; 35(9):709-717.
PMID: 39344664 PMC: 11391239. DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2024.23386.
ERCP-Related adverse events in pediatric patients: a 10-years single-site review.
Li Q, Li S, Hou S, Zhang L, Chen S, Wang J Pediatr Surg Int. 2024; 40(1):199.
PMID: 39019990 DOI: 10.1007/s00383-024-05784-z.
Jaber F, Alsakarneh S, Alsharaeh T, Salahat A, Jaber M, Abboud Y Dig Dis Sci. 2024; 69(6):2018-2025.
PMID: 38580887 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-024-08396-8.
The perfect biliary plastic stent: the search goes on.
Dinescu B, Voiosu T, Bengus A, Mateescu R, Voiosu M, Voiosu A Ann Gastroenterol. 2023; 36(5):490-496.
PMID: 37664231 PMC: 10433249. DOI: 10.20524/aog.2023.0826.