Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug effectivity in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of the 26 randomized controlled trials, including administration route, dose, and type of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug

Ref.	Year	Country	Route	Dose	NSAID type
Andrade et al[24], 2015	2015	México	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Bhatia et al[6], 2011	2011	India	IV	20 mg	Valdecoxib
Cheon et al[10], 2007	2007	United States	O	50 mg	Diclofenac
Döbrönte et al[7], 2014	2014	Hungary	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Elmunzer et al[25], 2012	2012	United States	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Hauser et al[11], 2016	2016	Croatia	R	100 mg	Diclofenac
Ishiwatari et al[12], 2016	2016	Japan	O	100 mg	Diclofenac
Kato et al[31], 2017	2017	Japan	O	400 mg	Celecoxib
Kato et al[13], 2019	2019	Japan	R	25/50 mg	Diclofenac
Khoshbaten et al[14], 2008	2008	Iran	R	50 mg	Diclofenac
Leerhøy et al[15], 2016	2016	Denmark	R	100 mg	Diclofenac
Levenick et al[26], 2016	2016	United States	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Li et al[27], 2019	2019	China	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Lua et al[16], 2015	2015	Malaysia	R	100 mg	Diclofenac
Mansour et al[32], 2016	2016	Iran	R	500 mg	Naproxen
Masjedizadeh et al[26], 2017	2017	Iran	R	50 mg	Indomethacin
Montaño et al[23], 2007	2007	México	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Hosseini et al[28], 2016	2016	Iran	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Murray et al[17], 2003	2003	Scotland	R	100 mg	Diclofenac
Otsuka et al[18], 2012	2012	Japan	R	50 mg	Diclofenac
Park et al[21], 2014	2014	South Korea	IM	100 mg	Diclofenac
Patai et al[29], 2015	2015	Hungary	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Quadros et al[33], 2016	2016	Brazil	IV	100 mg	Ketoprofen
Senol et al[19], 2009	2009	United States	IV	50 mg	Diclofenac
Sotoudehmanesh et al[30], 2007	2007	Iran	R	100 mg	Indomethacin
Uçar et al[20], 2016	2016	Turkey	IM and IV	75/100 mg	Diclofenac

NSAIDs: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; R: Rectal; IV: Intravenous; O: Oral; IM: Intramuscular.

Table 2 Characteristics of 26 randomized controlled trials, including comparison group (number), administration time (before, during, after, and before/after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography)

Ref.	Comparison (n)	Administration time (after, before, and during)	n	Intervention
Andrade et al[24], 2015	Glycerin (84)	Before ERCP	166	82
Bhatia et al[6], 2011	Glyceryl trinitrate (127)	Before ERCP	254	127
Cheon et al[10], 2007	Placebo SN (102)	Before and after ERCP	207	105
Döbrönte et al[7], 2014	Placebo SN (318)	After ERCP	665	347
Elmunzer et al[25], 2012	Placebo SN (307)	After ERCP	602	295
Hauser et al[11], 2016	Ceftazidime (143)	Before ERCP	272	129
Ishiwatari et al[12]., 2016	Placebo SN (214)	Before and after ERCP	430	216
Kato et al[31], 2017	Saline solution (85)	Before ERCP	170	85
Kato et al[13]., 2019	None (152)	Before ERCP	303	151
Khoshbaten et al[14], 2008	Placebo SN (50)	Before ERCP	100	50
Leerhøy et al[15], 2016	None (394)	After ERCP	772	378
Levenick et al[26], 2016	Placebo SN (226)	During ERCP	449	223
Li et al[27], 2019	Glycerin (50)	Before ERCP	100	50
Lua et al[16], 2015	None (75)	After ERCP	144	69
Mansour et al[32], 2016	Placebo SN (162)	Before ERCP	324	162
Masjedizadeh et al[26], 2017	Placebo lactated Ringer’s solution (124)	Before ERCP	186	62
Montaño et al[23], 2007	Glycerin (75)	Before ERCP	150	75
Hosseini et al[28], 2016	Saline solution (205)	Before ERCP	406	201
Murray et al[17], 2003	Placebo SN (110)	After ERCP	220	110
Otsuka et al[18], 2012	Saline solution (53)	Before ERCP	104	51
Park et al[21], 2014	Saline solution (170)	After ERCP	343	173
Patai et al[29], 2015	Placebo SN (269)	Before ERCP	539	270
Quadros et al[33], 2016	Saline solution (253)	After ERCP	477	224
Senol et al[19], 2009	Placebo SN (40)	After ERCP	80	40
Sotoudehmanesh et al[30], 2007	Placebo SN (245)	After ERCP	490	245
Uçar et al[20], 2016	None (50)	Before ERCP	150	100
Total	-	-	8103	4020

n = total number of patients, and number of patient intervention. ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Table 3 Description of 26 randomized controlled trials in relation to allocation, losses, blinding, prognosis, and JADAD

Ref.	Randomization	Allocation	Blinding	Losses	Prognosis	AIT	JADAD
Andrade et al[24], 2015	Yes	Yes	No	No	Homogeneous	Yes	3
Bhatia et al[6], 2011	Yes	Yes	No	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Cheon et al[10], 2007	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Homogeneous	No	5
Döbrönte et al[7], 2014	Yes	No	No	Yes	Homogeneous	No	3
Elmunzer et al[25], 2012	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	5
Hauser et al[11], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	5
Ishiwatari et al[12], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Homogeneous	No	3
Kato et al[31], 2017	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	4
Kato et al[13], 2019	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Homogeneous	No	5
Khoshbaten et al[14], 2008	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	No	5
Leerhøy et al[15], 2016	Yes	No	No	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Levenick et al[26], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	5
Li et al[27], 2019	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Homogeneous	No	5
Lua et al[16], 2015	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Homogeneous	Yes	3
Mansour et al[32], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	4
Masjedizadeh et al[26], 2017	Yes	No	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	4
Montaño et al[23], 2007	Yes	No	Yes	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Hosseini et al[28], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Murray et al[17], 2003	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Otsuka et al[18], 2012	Yes	No	No	No	Homogeneous	Yes	3
Park et al[21], 2014	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Patai et al[29], 2015	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Homogeneous	Yes	5
Quadros et al[33], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	5
Senol et al[19], 2009	Yes	No	No	No	Homogeneous	No	3
Sotoudehmanesh et al[30], 2007	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Homogeneous	Yes	4
Uçar et al[20], 2016	Yes	No	No	Yes	Homogeneous	No	3

AIT: Analysis of intervention and treatment.