Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Dec 25, 2015; 7(19): 1341-1349
Published online Dec 25, 2015. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i19.1341
Table 1 Characteristics of included trials
Ref.YearCountryTime of administrationRouteDoseType of NSAIDs used
Cheon et al[22]2007United StatesBefore ERCPOral50 mgDiclofenac
Döbrönte et al[23]2012HungaryBefore ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Döbrönte et al[24]2014HungaryBefore ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Elmunzer et al[25]2012United StatesAfter ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Khoshbaten et al[26]2008IranAfter ERCPRectal100 mgDiclofenac
Montaño Loza et al[27]2006MexicoBefore ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Montaño Loza et al[28]2007MexicoBefore ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Murray et al[29]2003United KingdomAfter ERCPRectal100 mgDiclofenac
Otsuka et al[30]2012JapanBefore ERCPRectal50 mgDiclofenac
Park et al[31]2014United States South KoreaAfter ERCPIntramuscular90 mgDiclofenac
Senol et al[32]2009TurkeyAfter ERCPIntravenous infusion75 mgDiclofenac
Sotoudehmanesh et al[33]2007IranBefore ERCPRectal100 mgIndomethacin
Zhao et al[34]2014ChinaAfter ERCPIntramuscular75 mgDiclofenac
Table 2 Summary and strength of the evidence from trials analysed on GradePro®
Author(s): Sajid et al
Date: 20/10/2015
Question: NSAID’s are an effective modality to reduce the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis?
Settings: All patients undergoing booth elective or emergency ERCP in endoscopy department for any indication by an experienced gastroenterologist/endoscopists
Bibliography: Adapted from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [2015, Issue (Is)]
Quality assessmentNo. of patientsEffectQuality
Importance
No. of studies
Design
Risk of bias
Inconsistency
Indirectness
Imprecision
Other considerations
NSAID's vs placebo
Control
Relative(95%CI)
Absolute
Incidence of overall pancreatitis (follow-up mean 3 mo; assessed with: Odds ratio)
14Randomised trialsSeriousNo serious inconsistencyNo serious indirectnessNo serious imprecisionStrong association138/1900248/1878OR 0.49 (0.36 to 0.67)63 fewer per 1000 (from 40 fewer to 80 fewer)HighCritical
(7.3%)(13.2%)
15.7%73 fewer per 1000 (from 46 fewer to 94 fewer)
Table 3 Reported quality variables in included studies
Ref.RandomizationPower calculationsITTBlindingConcealment
Cheon et al[22]YesYesYesYesYes
Döbrönte et al[23]YesYesNoYesYes
Döbrönte et al[24]YesYesNoYesYes
Elmunzer et al[25]YesYesYesYesYes
Khoshbaten et al[26]YesYesNoYesYes
Montaño Loza et al[27]YesYesNoYesYes
Montaño Loza et al[28]YesYesNoYesNot reported
Murray et al[29]YesYesNoYesYes
Otsuka et al[30]YesYesNoYesYes
Park et al[31]YesYesNoYesYes
Senol et al[32]YesYesNoNot reportedNot reported
Sotoudehmanesh et al[33]YesYesNoYesYes
Zhao et al[34]YesYesNoNoNot reported