Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGuzmán-Calderón, Edson
dc.contributor.authorMartinez-Moreno, Belen
dc.contributor.authorCasellas, Juan A.
dc.contributor.authorAparicio, José Ramón
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-30T15:21:44Z
dc.date.available2021-12-30T15:21:44Z
dc.date.issued2021-10-01
dc.identifier.issn17512972
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1751-2980.13041
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10757/658415
dc.descriptionEl texto completo de este trabajo no está disponible en el Repositorio Académico UPC por restricciones de la casa editorial donde ha sido publicado.es_PE
dc.description.abstractObjective: Pancreatic stones result from chronic pancreatitis and can occur in the main pancreatic duct, pancreatic branches or parenchyma. Although extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is considered the first-line treatment, per-oral pancreatoscopy (POP) has emerged as a useful method for treating pancreatic stones. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of POP-guided lithotripsy, electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) and laser lithotripsy (LL), in patients with pancreatolithiasis. Methods: Literature review was conducted in PubMed, OVID, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases for studies published up to August 2020. Results: Altogether 15 studies were analyzed, of which 11 were retrospective and four were prospective. The studies comprised 370 patients, of whom 66.4% were male. The patients underwent 218 EHL and 155 LL. The pooled technical and clinical success rate of the overall POP was 88.1% and 87.1%. For EHL-POP, the pooled technical success rate was 90.9% (95% CI 87.2%-95.2%) and the pooled clinical success rate was 89.8% (95% CI 87.2%-95.2%). While for LL-POP, the pooled technical and clinical success rate was 88.4% (95% CI 85.9%-95.1%) and 85.8% (95% CI 80.6%-91.6%). In total 43 adverse events occurred (12.1%; 95% CI 8.7%-15.5%). Conclusion: POP-guided lithotripsy has a high rate of technical and clinical success for managing pancreatolithiasis with a low complication rate. Both EHL-POP and LL-POP achieve similar efficacy in the endoscopic therapy of pancreatolithiasis. Further large randomized controlled trials are needed to compare EHL-POP and LL-POP with ESWL and evaluate whether POP may replace ESWL as the first-line management of pancreatolithiasis.es_PE
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_PE
dc.language.isoenges_PE
dc.publisherJohn Wiley and Sons Inces_PE
dc.relation.urlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1751-2980.13041es_PE
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccesses_PE
dc.sourceUniversidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)es_PE
dc.sourceRepositorio Academico - UPCes_PE
dc.subjectlithotripsyes_PE
dc.subjectpancreatolithiasises_PE
dc.subjectper-oral pancreatoscopyes_PE
dc.titlePer-oral pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy for the endoscopic management of pancreatolithiasis: A systematic review and meta-analysises_PE
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_PE
dc.identifier.eissn17512980
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Digestive Diseaseses_PE
dc.description.peerreviewRevisión por pareses_PE
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85117160284
dc.identifier.scopusidSCOPUS_ID:85117160284
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of Digestive Diseases
dc.source.volume22
dc.source.issue10
dc.source.beginpage572
dc.source.endpage581
dc.identifier.isni0000 0001 2196 144X


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record