Efficacy and safety of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACT The altered anatomy in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) makes conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) a technically challenging procedure. EUS–directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) and laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) are alternative modalities used with comparable efficacy and adverse events in such patients. We conducted a meta-analysis comparing EDGE and LA-ERCP to assess the efficacy and safety in patients with RYGB. We conducted a comprehensive literature search from inception to July 7, 2022, on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases using the core concepts of EDGE and LA-ERCP. We excluded case reports, case series (<10 patients), and review articles. Relative risk (RR) was calculated when comparing dichotomous variables, whereas mean difference was calculated for continuous outcomes. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and P values (<0.05 considered significant) were also generated. The search strategy yielded a total of 55 articles. We finalized 4 studies with total 192 patients (75 EDGE and 117 LA-ERCP). The rates of technical success were not significantly different for LA-ERCP and EDGE (RR, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.939–1.051; P = 0.830, I 2 = 0%) Similarly, no difference in adverse events was noted between the 2 groups (RR, 1.216; 95% CI, 0.561–2.634; P = 0.620, I 2 = 10.67%). Shorter procedure time was noted for EDGE compared with the LA-ERCP group (mean difference, 91.53 min; 95% CI, 69.911–113.157 min; P < 0.001, I 2 = 8.32%). EDGE and LA-ERCP are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety. In addition, EDGE has overall lower procedural time. Our study suggests that EDGE should be considered as a first-line therapy if expertise available.

Topics & Concepts