Systematic review comparing endoscopic, percutaneous and surgical pancreatic pseudocyst drainage

Table 6 Endoscopic ultrasound vs surgical drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts

Ref.	Sample size	Size (cm)	Clinical success	Hospital stay (d)	Reintervention	Mortalities	Adverse events	Bleeding	Intra-abdominal infection
Varadarajulu et al[8]	EUS: 20	10.5 (9-14.9)1	95%	2 (1-4)13	5%	0	0	0	0
	Open: 20	11 (8.4-14.5)1	100%	6 (5-9)1	5%	0	2%	1	0
Melman et al[9]	EUS: 45	9.1 (0.4)	51.1%2	3.9 (0-25)2	-	0	15.6%	2.2%	0
	Lap: 16	10.4 (0.5)	87.5%	6.9 (3-23)2	-	0	25%	12.5%	0
	Open: 22	9.5 (0.8)	81.2%	10.8 (4-82)2	-	0	22.7%	0	0
Varadarajulu et al[10]	EUS: 20	9.8	95%	2.6 (1-11)23	0	0	0	0	0
	Open: 10	8.9	100%	6.5 (4-20)2	10%	0	0	0	0

¹Values in mean ± interquartile range;

²Values in mean (range) except otherwise indicated;

³Indicates significant differences between the 2 groups. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound drainage; Lap: Laparoscopic drainage; Open: Open drainage.