Meta-analysis of single session versus two-stage endoscopic ultrasound directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) in gastric bypass patients.

IF 8 1区医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY

Gastrointestinal endoscopy Pub Date : 2026-10-19 DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2026.10.011

Sahib Singh, Bishnu Sapkota, Noam Peleg, Saurabh Chandan, Kelita Singh, Savio John, Hafiz Muzaffar Akbar Khan, Mohammad Bilal, Douglas G Adler

{"title":"Meta-analysis of single session versus two-stage endoscopic ultrasound directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) in gastric bypass patients.","authors":"Sahib Singh, Bishnu Sapkota, Noam Peleg, Saurabh Chandan, Kelita Singh, Savio John, Hafiz Muzaffar Akbar Khan, Mohammad Bilal, Douglas G Adler","doi":"10.1016/j.gie.2026.10.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and aims: Studies have shown variable outcomes when comparing single session endoscopic ultrasound directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (SS EDGE) and two-stage EDGE. We conducted a meta-analysis.Methods: Online databases were searched for studies comparing SS EDGE to two-stage EDGE in patients with gastric bypass. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, stent dislodgement/migration, overall adverse events (AEs), persistent fistula and patients with weight gain. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.Results: A total of 7 observational studies with 346 patients (47% SS EDGE, 53% two-stage EDGE) were included. The mean age was 58 years and 23% patients were males. Around 80% EDGE procedures were done for biliary pathologies with the rest being for pancreatic pathologies. When comparing the two approaches, no significant differences were found with respect to technical success (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.53, p = 0.37), clinical success (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.38 to 9.17, p = 0.44), stent dislodgement/migration (OR 1.70, 95% CI 0.88 to 3.31, p = 0.12), overall AEs (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 5.48, p = 0.58), persistent fistula (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.09, p = 0.99), and patients with weight gain (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.84, p = 0.75).Conclusion: SS EDGE and two-stage EDGE were found to have similar outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety.","PeriodicalId":12542,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2026.10.011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Studies have shown variable outcomes when comparing single session endoscopic ultrasound directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (SS EDGE) and two-stage EDGE. We conducted a meta-analysis.

Methods: Online databases were searched for studies comparing SS EDGE to two-stage EDGE in patients with gastric bypass. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, stent dislodgement/migration, overall adverse events (AEs), persistent fistula and patients with weight gain. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

Results: A total of 7 observational studies with 346 patients (47% SS EDGE, 53% two-stage EDGE) were included. The mean age was 58 years and 23% patients were males. Around 80% EDGE procedures were done for biliary pathologies with the rest being for pancreatic pathologies. When comparing the two approaches, no significant differences were found with respect to technical success (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.53, p = 0.37), clinical success (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.38 to 9.17, p = 0.44), stent dislodgement/migration (OR 1.70, 95% CI 0.88 to 3.31, p = 0.12), overall AEs (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 5.48, p = 0.58), persistent fistula (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.09, p = 0.99), and patients with weight gain (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.84, p = 0.75).

Conclusion: SS EDGE and two-stage EDGE were found to have similar outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety.

查看原文本刊更多论文

胃分流术患者单期与两期超声内镜引导下经胃ERCP （EDGE）的meta分析。

背景和目的：研究表明，在比较单阶段内镜超声引导下经胃内镜逆行胆管造影（SS EDGE）和两阶段EDGE时，结果不同。我们进行了荟萃分析。方法：检索在线数据库，比较胃分流术患者的SS EDGE和两期EDGE的研究。研究结果包括技术成功、临床成功、支架移位/移位、总不良事件（ae）、持续瘘管和患者体重增加。计算合并优势比（OR）和95%置信区间（CI）。结果：共纳入7项观察性研究，共346例患者（47%为SS EDGE， 53%为两期EDGE）。平均年龄58岁，男性占23%。大约80%的EDGE手术用于胆道病变，其余的用于胰腺病变。比较两种方法的时候,没有发现显著差异对技术成功(或0.34,95%可信区间0.03到3.53,p = 0.37),临床成功(或1.88,95%可信区间0.38到9.17,p = 0.44),支架移动/迁移(或1.70,95%可信区间0.88到3.31,p = 0.12),整体AEs(或1.45,95%可信区间0.38到5.48,p = 0.58),持续瘘(或1.00,95%可信区间0.32到3.09,p = 0.99),和患者体重增加(或1.25,95%可信区间0.32到4.84,p = 0.75)。结论：SS EDGE和两期EDGE在疗效和安全性方面具有相似的结果。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Gastrointestinal endoscopy 医学-胃肠肝病学

CiteScore

10.30

自引率

7.80%

发文量

1441

审稿时长

38 days

期刊介绍： Gastrointestinal Endoscopy is a journal publishing original, peer-reviewed articles on endoscopic procedures for studying, diagnosing, and treating digestive diseases. It covers outcomes research, prospective studies, and controlled trials of new endoscopic instruments and treatment methods. The online features include full-text articles, video and audio clips, and MEDLINE links. The journal serves as an international forum for the latest developments in the specialty, offering challenging reports from authorities worldwide. It also publishes abstracts of significant articles from other clinical publications, accompanied by expert commentaries.