Effect of Aggressive Fluid Therapy on Outcomes after Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Aggressive hydration for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's (LR) solution reduces the frequency and severity of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). In this trial sequential analysis (TSA), we aimed to evaluate the prophylactic effect of aggressive hydration on PEP in specific patient subgroups and to determine the need for additional RCTs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic and comprehensive search to identify all randomized controlled studies published through August 2021 that examined the effectiveness of aggressive hydration for preventing PEP. The primary outcome was the frequency of PEP. We also performed TSA to calculate the required information size and assess whether our results were conclusive.

RESULTS

The analysis included 12 studies involving 2,501 patients. According to the TSA, the overall frequency of PEP was significantly lower in the aggressive hydration group (5.6%; 74 of 1,327 patients) than in the control group (13.1%; 154 of 1,174 patients) (risk ratio [RR]: 0.458; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.350-0.599). In the subgroup analysis of patients with average risk, the cumulative Z curve crossed both the conventional test boundary and the trial sequential monitoring boundary. However, in the high-risk group and in patients with moderate-to-severe PEP, the Z curve did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary.

CONCLUSIONS

This TSA indicates that aggressive hydration is effective in the overall prevention of PEP. However, additional RCTs are required to examine the prophylactic effect of aggressive hydration with LR on PEP in high-risk populations.

Efficacy of Combining Aggressive Hydration With Rectal Indomethacin in Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (ERCP). No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has compared the efficacy of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommended interventions for PEP prevention. We assessed the effectiveness of these interventions using network meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs investigating guideline-recommended interventions and their combinations [rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): indomethacin or diclofenac, pancreatic stent (PS), aggressive hydration (AH), sublingual nitrate) for PEP prevention. We performed direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank interventions. Subgroup network meta-analysis for high-risk populations was also performed. We identified a total of 38 RCTs with 10 different interventions. Each intervention was protective against PEP on direct and network meta-analysis compared with controls. Except AH+diclofenac and NSAIDs+ sublingual nitrate, AH+indomethacin was associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP compared with PS [odds ratio (OR), 0.09; credible interval (CrI), 0.003-0.71], indomethcin+PS (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.85), diclofenac (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), AH (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), sublingual nitrate (OR, 0.07; CrI, 0.002-0.63), and indomethacin (OR, 0.06; CrI, 0.002-0.43). AH with either rectal NSAIDs or sublingual nitrate had similar efficacy. AH+indomethacin was the best intervention for preventing PEP with 95.3% probability of being ranked first. For high-risk patients, although the efficacy of PS and indomethacin were comparable, PS had an 80.8% probability of being ranked first. AH+indomethacin seems the best intervention for preventing PEP. For high-risk patients, PS seems the most effective strategy. The potential of combination of interventions need to be explored further.

Rectal NSAIDs-based combination modalities are superior to single modalities for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Different modalities have been employed to reduce the risk and severity of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). However, there has been a paucity of studies comparing the efficacy of various prophylactic modalities for preventing PEP. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to determine the relative efficacy of pancreatic duct stents and pharmacological modalities for preventing PEP.

METHODS

We performed a systematic and comprehensive search to identify and analyze all randomized controlled studies published until June 2020 that examined the effectiveness of pancreatic duct stents, rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) based regimens, hydration, and their combinations for the prevention of PEP. The primary outcome was the frequency of PEP. An NMA was performed to combine direct and indirect comparisons of different prophylactic modalities.

RESULTS

The NMA included 46 studies evaluating 18 regimens in 16,241 patients. Based on integral analysis of predictive interval plots, and expected mean ranking and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values, combination prophylaxis with indomethacin + lactated Ringer's solution (LR), followed by diclofenac + nitrate and indomethacin + normal saline, was found to be the most efficacious modality for the overall prevention of PEP. Indomethacin + LR, followed by diclofenac and pancreatic duct stents, was the most efficacious modality for high-risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Rectal NSAIDs-based combination regimens with aggressive hydration or nitrate are superior to single modalities for the prevention of PEP.

Combined use of indomethacin and hydration is the best conservative approach for post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is a life-threatening complication. Given the lack of a causative treatment for pancreatitis, it is of vital importance to minimize this risk of PEP. Multi-target preventive therapy may be the best choice for PEP prevention as disease development is multifactorial.

AIM

We aimed to assess the efficacy of a combination of indomethacin and hydration - type and amount - for PEP prevention via a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Through a systematic search in three databases, we searched all randomized controlled trials involving hydration and indomethacin and ranked the PEP preventive efficacy with a Bayesian network meta-analysis using the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guideline. The RoB2 tool was used for risk of bias assessment, surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for ranking and PROSPERO for the study protocol [reg. no. CRD42018112698]. We used risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% credible intervals (95% CrI).

RESULTS

The quantitative analysis included 7559 patients from 24 randomized controlled trials. Based on the SUCRA values, a combination of lactated Ringer's and indomethacin is more effective than single therapy with a 94% certainty. The percent relative risk ratios estimate preventive efficacy 70-99% higher for combinations than single therapies. Aggressive hydration with indomethacin (SUCRA 100%) is also significantly more effective than all other interventions (percent relative effect 94.3-98.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

A one-hit-on-each-target therapeutic approach is recommended in PEP prevention with an easily accessible combination of indomethacin and aggressive hydration for all average and high-risk patients without contraindication.

Aggressive Hydration With Ringer's Lactate in the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Meta-Analysis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is a dangerous complication and occurs in a considerable number of patients. However, since well-randomized controlled trials investigating aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate are lacking, this meta-analysis assessed the role of aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone or in combination with other therapies in the prevention of PEP.

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for relevant articles. The search engine was set to randomize controlled trials and prospective cohorts assessing Ringer's lactate in PEP prevention either alone or in combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and stent. The keywords "aggressive hydration," "Ringer's lactate," "post-ERCP pancreatitis," "NSAIDs," "stent placement," and "somatostatin analogs" were used. The search was limited to a study on humans published in English with no limitation to the study period.

Two hundred and six articles were retrieved. Only eight articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The studies showed a reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis using aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone (odds ratio 0.23, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.40, P-value < 0.001, I² for heterogeneity = 0%, P-value = 0.61, Chi-square value 1.83, and degrees of freedom (df) 3. In addition, the combination of Ringer's lactate with stents or NSAIDs was superior to Ringer's lactate alone (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 - 0.98, P-value < 0.04, I² for heterogeneity = 0%, P-value = 0.48, Chi-square value 2.47, and df 3). Aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone was effective in the prevention of PEP with a superior effect when combined with stents and NSAIDs.

Aggressive hydration with lactated ringer solution in prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). There was no conclusion on the prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP) by Lactated Ringer Solution.

AIM

The purpose of this meta analyses is to determine whether aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution reduced the incidence of PEP.

METHODS

We retrieved randomized clinical trials comparing the preventive effects of aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution and standard hydration on PEP from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, the Web of Science, Clinical Trial.gov, Scopus database, CNKI, CQVIP and WanFang Data. Primary outcome was incidence of PEP. Secondary outcomes included incidence of hyperamylasemia, abdominal pain and adverse events.

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials with 2200 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that compared with standard hydration, aggressive hydration reduced the incidence of PEP (odds ratio [OR], 0.40; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.26-0.63; P < .0001). Compared with standard hydration, aggressive hydration also reduced the incidence of hyperamylasemia after ERCP (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38-0.60; P < .0001). There was significant difference between aggressive hydration and standard hydration in the incidence of abdominal pain (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11-0.73; P = .008). There was no difference in adverse events between aggressive hydration and standard hydration (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.21-4.13; P = .93). Sensitivity analyses showed that neither alternative effect measures nor statistical models regarding heterogeneity affected the conclusions of this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution during perioperative period of ERCP can prevent PEP.