Per‐oral pancreatoscopy‐guided lithotripsy for the endoscopic management of pancreatolithiasis: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

• Published in: Journal of digestive diseases 2021-10, Vol.22 (10), p.572-581
• Main Authors: Guzmán‐Calderón, Edson, Martinez‐Moreno, Belen, Casellas, Juan A., Aparicio, José Ramón
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adverse events; Clinical trials; Endoscopy; Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy; Gallstones; Literature reviews; Lithotripsy; Meta-analysis; Pancreas; Pancreatitis; pancreatolithiasis; Parenchyma; Patients; per‐oral pancreatoscopy; Success; Systematic review
• ISSN: 1751-2972; 1751-2980
• DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.13041

Objective 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.