Role of pancreatoscopy in management of pancreatic disease: A systematic review

Table 1 Per oral pancreatoscopy-guided pancreatic ductal stone therapy

Year	Ref.	Patients, n	Design	Device	EHL/LL	Success rate	AE %	Follow-up in mo
1999	Howell et al[14]	6	R/M	M-B	EHL	83	0	6
2009	Fishman et al[51]	6	R/M	Spyglass®	EHL	50	0	NA
2011	2Maydeo et al[21]	4	P/S	Spyglass®	LL	100	13.3	1
2013	Alatawi et al[12]	5	P/S	Spyglass®	LL	80%	0	21
2014	Attwel et al[19]	46	R/S	Olympus M-B (31) vs Spyglass® (15)	LL/EHL1	68 vs 73 (scope type)	10	18
2014	Ito et al[23]	8	R/S	Spyglass®	EHL1	37.5	25	NA
2015	Attwell et al[9]	28	R/M	Spyglass®	LL1	79	29	13
2016	2Navaneethan et al[52]	5	R/M	Spyglass®	LL	80	0	NA
2017	Bekkali et al[53]	6	R/S	Spyglass®	EHL	83	0	30
2017	Parbhu et al[22]	20	R/M	Spyglass®	EHL/LL	85	7.3	NA

¹Combined with ESWL.

²Combined study of patients with biliary and pancreatic ductal stones.

EHL: Electro hydraulic lithotripsy; LL: Laser lithotripsy; P: Prospective; R: Retrospective; S: Single-center; M: Multicenter; AE: Adverse events; M-B: Mother baby.