Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy in patients with complete pancreas divisum and acute recurrent pancreatitis: a metanalysis

Background and Aims: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital variant of the pancreatic ductal system and a potential cause of acute recurrent pancreatitis (ARP). Endoscopic minor papilla sphincterotomy (MiES) is the most common procedure performed in the management of PD-related ARP. The aim of this study is to perform a meta-analysis estimating the efficacy and the safety of MiES in the management of patients with PD-related ARP. Methods: A research was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE and Web of science, the studies were reviewed and selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Evaluation of Heterogeneity and publication bias was performed, and a random effect model was used to estimate the effect size of each study. Results: One hundred and thirteen articles were selected and reviewed, 13 met the inclusion criteria. All the studies were retrospective with a mean follow-up duration of 45.9 months. A total of 323 patients with PD-related ARP treated with MiES were included in the meta-analysis. The overall clinical success rate of MiES (defined as no further episodes of ARP, reduction of episodes of ARP, or improvement in quality of life) was of 77% (95%CI: 72%–81%; p = 0.30). Evaluating only the studies with clinical success rate defined as “no further AP in the follow-up” the clinical success rate was of 69.8% (95%CI: 61.3%–77.2%; p = 0.57), while evaluating the studies with other definitions (reduction of episodes of ARP or improvement in quality of life) the clinical success rate was of 81.2% (95%CI: 75.2%–86.1%; p = 0.45). The common fixed effects model disclosed a 25.5% overall adverse events rate (95%CI: 19.3%–32.8%; p = 0.42): acute pancreatitis in 14.3% (95%CI: 9.7%–20.6%; p = 0.36), bleeding in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%–10.4%; p = 0.98), and other adverse events in 5.6% (95%CI: 2.9%–10.4%; p = 0.67). Conclusion: MiES is an effective and relatively safe treatment in the management of PD-related ARP. The retrospective nature of the studies selected is the main limitations of this metanalysis. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these data.