Systematic review comparing endoscopic, percutaneous and surgical pancreatic pseudocyst drainage

Table 7 Endoscopic ultrasound vs esophagogastroduodenoscopy drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts

Ref.	Sample size	Size (cm)1	Clinical success	Hospital stay (d)	Reintervention	Mortalities	Adverse events	Bleeding	Intra-abdominal infection
Park et al[11]	EUS: 31	8.2 (3.8)	89%	-	6.5%	0	7%	3.2%	-
	EGD: 29	7.4 (4)	86%	-	6.5%	0	10%	6.9%	-
Varadarajulu et al[12]	EUS: 15	6.5 (5-12)2	100%5	2 (1-9)2	-	0	0	0	-
	EGD: 15	7 (4.2-13)2	33%4	1 (1-8)2	-	6.7%	13.3%	13.3%	-
Kahaleh et al[13]	EUS: 46	8.6 (4-20)3	84%	-	10.9%	0	19.6%	4.3%	8.7%
	EGD: 53	9.5 (3-20)3	91%	-	9.4%	0	18.9%	1.9%	7.5%

¹Values in mean ± SD;

²Values in mean (interquartile range);

³Values in mean (range);

⁴Values in median (range) except otherwise indicated;

⁵Indicates significant differences between the 2 groups. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound drainage; EGD: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy drainage.