Performance and safety of percutaneous cholangioscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Percutaneous cholangioscopy (PerC) offers an alternative for patients with an inaccessible biliary tree. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of this technique. Methods: A search in Medline, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed for studies assessing PerC up to October 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as successful stone identification or stricture workup. Secondary outcomes included therapeutic success (stone extraction, stenting) and complication rate. A subgroup analysis compared previous-generation and modern cholangioscopes. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model and the results were reported as percentages with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Fourteen studies (682 patients) were eligible for analysis. The rate of diagnostic success was 98.7% (95%CI 97.6-99.8%; I2=31.19%) and therapeutic success was 88.6% (95%CI 82.8-94.3%; I2=74.92%). Adverse events were recorded in 17.1% (95%CI 10.7-23.5%; I2=77.56%), of which 15.9% (95%CI 9.8-21.9%; I2=75.98%) were minor and 0.6% (95%CI 0.1-1.2%; I2=0%) major. The Spyglass system showed null heterogeneity for all outcomes; compared with older-generation endoscopes it offered comparable diagnostic success, but yielded significantly superior therapeutic success (96.1%, 95%CI 90-100%; I2=0% vs. 86.4%, 95%CI 79.2-93.6%; I2=81.41%; P=0.02]. Conclusion: PerC, especially using currently available cholangioscopes, is associated with high diagnostic and therapeutic success.

Revealing Insights: A Comprehensive Overview of Gastric Outlet Obstruction Management, with Special Emphasis on EUS-Guided Gastroenterostomy.

Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) poses a common and challenging clinical scenario, characterized by mechanical blockage in the pylorus, distal stomach, or duodenum, resulting in symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and early satiety. Its diverse etiology encompasses both benign and malignant disorders. The spectrum of current treatment modalities extends from conservative approaches to more invasive interventions, incorporating procedures like surgical gastroenterostomy (SGE), self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) placement, and the advanced technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). While surgery is favored for longer life expectancy, stents are preferred in malignant gastric outlet stenosis. The novel EUS-GE technique, employing a lumen-apposing self-expandable metal stent (LAMS), combines the immediate efficacy of stents with the enduring benefits of gastroenterostomy. Despite its promising outcomes, EUS-GE is a technically demanding procedure requiring specialized expertise and facilities.

Endoscopic Management of Difficult Biliary Stones: An Evergreen Issue.

Choledocholithiasis is one of the most common indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in daily practice. Although the majority of stones are small and can be easily removed in a single endoscopy session, approximately 10-15% of patients have complex biliary stones, requiring additional procedures for an optimum clinical outcome. A plethora of endoscopic methods is available for the removal of difficult biliary stones, including papillary large balloon dilation, mechanical lithotripsy, and electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy. In-depth knowledge of these techniques and the emerging literature on them is required to yield the most optimal therapeutic effects. This narrative review aims to describe the definition of difficult bile duct stones based on certain characteristics and streamline their endoscopic retrieval using various modalities to achieve higher clearance rates.

Cannulation rates and technical performance evaluation of commericially available single-use duodenoscopes for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Single use duodenoscopes were developed to reduce the risk of infection transmission from contaminated reusable duodenoscopes. To this end, we examined various biliary interventions using single use duodenoscopes in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHODS: Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception through Aug 2022 to identify studies reporting on the performance of single use duodenoscopes for ERCP. RESULTS: Seven articles were included in the final analysis that included 642 patients (318 males). The Exalt Model D duodenoscope was used in most cases (88.8%) followed by the aScope Duodeno (11.2%) for ERCP. Most ERCPs had a complexity grade of 2 (n = 303) and 3 (n = 198). The pooled cumulative rate of successful cannulation was 95% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 93-96%, I2=0%, P = 0.46). Sphincterotomy was successfully performed in all cases. The pooled cumulative rate of PEP was 2% (95% CI: 0.4-3.4%, I2=0%, P = 0.80). The pooled cumulative rate of total adverse events was 7% (95% CI: 4-10%, I2=47%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis show that single use duodenoscopes are associated with high cannulation rates, technical performance, and safety profile.

Cold-snare endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: Systematic review and pooled-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mirroring the experience with colonic resections, cold snare-based techniques have been recently proposed for non-ampullary duodenal lesions to reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs). As the duodenal wall is thinner and more vascularized than in the colon, electrocautery-related AEs are relevant issues in this setting. AIMS: We performed a systematic review with pooled-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this technique. METHODS: Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to January 2023. Full articles including patients with duodenal lesions resected by cold-snare technique were eligible. The adverse events (i.e., bleeding, perforation, stricture), complete resection, and recurrence rates were pooled using a random model. RESULTS: Eleven studies were eligible, providing data on 3137 lesions removed from 233 patients. The overall AE rate for cold snaring was 0.25% (95% CI, 0.19%-0.69%). Among the three studies comparing cold- and hot-snare approaches, procedure-related bleeding rate was significantly lower with cold approach (OR 1.21, 0.51-2.85; p = 0.66). The complete resection rate was 99.40% (95% CI, 98.60%-100%), with a residual/recurrence rate of 12.95% (95% CI, 4.75%-21.16%). On univariate meta-regression, lesion size significantly affected both the adverse events and recurrence risk. CONCLUSION: Cold-snare resection appears effective and extremely safe for resecting non-ampullary duodenal lesions.

Success rates of fixation techniques on prevention of esophageal stent migration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal stenting is an important intervention for managing malignant and benign dysphagia, with stent migration representing a common drawback. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to assess the benefit of stent fixation over nonfixation. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until January 2023 for comparative studies evaluating the migration rates of esophageal stents with versus without (control) fixation. The primary outcome was migration rate. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rate. A subgroup analysis stratified the results based on different fixation techniques: suturing, over-the-scope (OTS) clipping, and through-the-scope (TTS) clipping. Meta-analysis was based on a random effects model and the results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 %CIs. RESULTS: 10 studies (1014 patients) were included. The rate of stent migration was significantly lower after fixation (OR 0.20, 95 %CI 0.11-0.37; I2  = 59 %, P = 0.01). The adverse event rate was similar between fixation and control groups (OR 0.65, 95 %CI 0.28-1.52; I2  = 55 %, P = 0.06). In the subgroup analysis, all fixation techniques remained superior to nonfixation of stents (suturing OR 0.23, 95 %CI 0.10-0.53; OTS clips OR 0.31, 95 %CI 0.17-0.58; TTS clips OR 0.10, 95 %CI 0.03-0.38); however, only the OTS and TTS clip groups achieved nonsignificant heterogeneity (I2  = 0 %, P = 0.67 and P = 0.73, respectively). No difference between techniques was recorded for migration rates. CONCLUSION: Esophageal stent fixation was associated with significantly lower migration rates compared with nonfixation of stents, regardless of fixation technique and stenting indication.

Comparative diagnostic yield of different endoscopic techniques for tissue sampling of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue sampling techniques for subepithelial lesions. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of bite-on-bite biopsy, mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95%CI. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were identified. EUS-FNB was significantly superior to EUS-FNA in terms of sample adequacy (RR 1.20 [95%CI 1.05-1.45]), whereas none of the other techniques significantly outperformed EUS-FNA. Additionally, bite-on-bite biopsy was significantly inferior to EUS-FNB (RR 0.55 [95%CI 0.33-0.98]). Overall, EUS-FNB appeared to be the best technique (surface under cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score 0.90) followed by MIAB (SUCRA 0.83), whereas bite-on-bite biopsy showed the poorest performance. When considering lesions <20 mm, MIAB, but not EUS-FNB, showed significantly higher accuracy rates compared with EUS-FNA (RR 1.68 [95%CI 1.02-2.88]). Overall, MIAB ranked as the best intervention for lesions <20 mm (SUCRA score 0.86 for adequacy and 0.91 for accuracy), with EUS-FNB only slightly superior to EUS-FNA. When rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) was available, no difference between EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA, and MIAB was observed. CONCLUSION: EUS-FNB and MIAB appeared to provide better performance, whereas bite-on-bite sampling was significantly inferior to the other techniques. MIAB seemed to be the best option for smaller lesions, whereas EUS-FNA remained competitive when ROSE was available.

Predictive models in EUS/ERCP.

Predictive models (PMs) in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have the potential to improve patient outcomes, enhance diagnostic accuracy, and guide therapeutic interventions. This review aims to summarize the current state of predictive models in ERCP and EUS and their clinical implications. To be considered useful in clinical practice a PM should be accurate, easy to perform, and may consider objective variables. PMs in ERCP estimate correct indication, probability of success, and the risk of developing adverse events. These models incorporate patient-related factors and technical aspects of the procedure. In the field of EUS, these models utilize clinical and imaging data to predict the likelihood of malignancy, presence of specific lesions, or risk of complications related to therapeutic interventions. Further research, validation, and refinement are necessary to maximize the utility and impact of these models in routine clinical practice.

Models and scores to predict adequacy of bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Adequate bowel preparation is of paramount importance for the effectiveness of preventive colonoscopy as it allows visualization of the mucosal surface and adenomas detection, the pre-malignant lesions leading to colon cancer. Still, a considerable portion of patients fail to achieve adequate bowel cleansing, with predictors of inadequate bowel preparation being at the focal point of several studies, so far. Incorporation of these factors within predictive models has been implemented in an effort to promptly identify patients at risk for inadequate bowel preparation and thus, timely adopt practices that have the potential to improve bowel cleansing. Ultimately, this could lead to improved procedural outcomes not only in terms of neoplastic detection rate but also interval repeat procedures, expenses, patient convenience and adverse events risk. Aim of this manuscript is to present an up to date overview of all predictive scores/models addressing bowel cleansing adequacy in everyday clinical practice.

Effect of add-on devices with projections on screening colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Add-on devices with projections, e.g., Endocuff, Endocuff Vision, EndoRings, and Wingcap, placed on the distal tip of the colonoscope promise to improve the detection of precancerous lesions. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the performance of these devices exclusively among individuals undergoing colonoscopy for screening purpose. Methods: A computerized literature search was performed across MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials that compared standard colonoscopy (SC) to procedures using add-on devices. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR), while secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced ADR (AADR), and sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SSLDR). The effect size on study outcomes was calculated using a random-effects model and presented as the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Seven studies enrolling a total of 5785 patients were included. The use of add-on-devices with projections was associated with a higher ADR compared to SC: 45.9% vs. 41.1%; RR 1.18, 95%CI 1.02-1.37; P=0.03; I2=79%. Although PDR was higher in screening colonoscopies assisted by add-on devices as compared to SC, the difference failed to reach significance: 55.1% vs. 50.8%; RR 1.10, 95%CI 0.96-1.26; P=0.17; I2=75%. No difference was found between procedures assisted by add-on devices with projections and SC colonoscopies in terms of AADR (18.5% vs. 17.6%; RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.79-1.27; P=0.98; I2=56%) or SSLDR (6.8% vs. 5.8%; RR 1.17, 95%CI 0.95-1.44; P=0.15; I2=0%). Conclusion: Colonoscopy assisted by add-on devices with projections achieves a better ADR compared to SC among individuals undergoing screening for bowel cancer.

The impact of a multidisciplinary team approach on the management of focal pancreatic lesions: a single tertiary center experience.

Background: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings aim to optimize patient management. We evaluated the impact of MDT discussions on the management and diagnosis of focal pancreatic lesions in a single tertiary center. Methods: All patients with an initial diagnosis of solid or cystic pancreatic lesion discussed in our institution's MDT meeting on pancreatic diseases between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, were included. The impact of MDT discussion on patient management, defined as a modification of the initially proposed therapeutic plan after MDT discussion, as well as the criteria leading to this modification, were the primary outcomes. Impact on diagnosis was the secondary outcome. Results: A total of 522 patients were included. Of these, 185 (35.4%) and 337 (64.6%) had an initial diagnosis of cystic or solid lesion, respectively. The most common referral query was regarding the management plan (349/522; 66.9%). Endoscopy was the procedure most often proposed before MDT discussion (109/522; 20.9%). Overall, the MDT discussion led to modification of the management plan in 377/522 patients (72.2%), with a statistically significant difference between cystic and solid lesions (63.2% vs. 77.2%; P<0.001). Management modifications were mainly driven by revision of cross-sectional radiological images. MDT discussion led to modification of the diagnosis in 92/522 patients (17.6%), with a significant difference regarding cystic lesions (35.7% vs. 7.7%; P<0.001). Conclusion: MDT discussion impacts the management of patients with cystic and solid pancreatic lesions, leading to a modification of the initially proposed management in two-thirds of them, mainly through revision of cross-sectional imaging.

Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia During Colonoscopy : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence computer-aided detection (CADe) of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy may increase adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and reduce adenoma miss rates, but it may increase overdiagnosis and overtreatment of nonneoplastic polyps. PURPOSE: To quantify the benefits and harms of CADe in randomized trials. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. (PROSPERO: CRD42022293181). DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases through February 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials comparing CADe-assisted with standard colonoscopy for polyp and cancer detection. DATA EXTRACTION: Adenoma detection rate (proportion of patients with ≥1 adenoma), number of adenomas detected per colonoscopy, advanced adenoma (≥10 mm with high-grade dysplasia and villous histology), number of serrated lesions per colonoscopy, and adenoma miss rate were extracted as benefit outcomes. Number of polypectomies for nonneoplastic lesions and withdrawal time were extracted as harm outcomes. For each outcome, studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one randomized trials on 18 232 patients were included. The ADR was higher in the CADe group than in the standard colonoscopy group (44.0% vs. 35.9%; relative risk, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.33]; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to a 55% (risk ratio, 0.45 [CI, 0.35 to 0.58]) relative reduction in miss rate (moderate-certainty evidence). More nonneoplastic polyps were removed in the CADe than the standard group (0.52 vs. 0.34 per colonoscopy; mean difference [MD], 0.18 polypectomy [CI, 0.11 to 0.26 polypectomy]; low-certainty evidence). Mean inspection time increased only marginally with CADe (MD, 0.47 minute [CI, 0.23 to 0.72 minute]; moderate-certainty evidence). LIMITATIONS: This review focused on surrogates of patient-important outcomes. Most patients, however, may consider cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality important outcomes. The effect of CADe on such patient-important outcomes remains unclear. CONCLUSION: The use of CADe for polyp detection during colonoscopy results in increased detection of adenomas but not advanced adenomas and in higher rates of unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: European Commission Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship.

Jejunal access for enteral nutrition: A practical guide for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension and direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy.

For patients requiring long-term (>4 weeks) jejunal nutrition, jejunal medication delivery, or decompression, a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension (PEG-J) or a direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (DPEJ) may be indicated. PEG-J is the preferred option if a PEG tube is already in place or if simultaneous gastric decompression and jejunal nutrition are needed. DPEJ is recommended for patients with altered anatomy due to foregut surgery, high risk of jejunal extension migration, and whenever PEG-J fails. Successful placement rates are lower for DPEJ but recent publications have reported improvements, partly due to the use of balloon-assisted enteroscopy. Both techniques are contraindicated in cases of active peritonitis, uncorrectable coagulopathy, and ongoing bowel ischaemia, and relative contraindications include, among other, peptic ulcer disease and haemodynamic or respiratory instability. In this narrative review, we present the most recent evidence on indications, contraindications, technical considerations, adverse events, and outcomes of PEG-J and DPEJ.

EUS-Guided Diagnosis of Gastric Subepithelial Lesions, What Is New?

Gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) are intramural lesions that arise underneath the gastric mucosa. SELs can be benign, but can also be malignant or have malignant potential. Therefore, correct diagnosis is crucial. Endosonography has been established as the diagnostic gold standard. Although the identification of some of these lesions can be carried out immediately, solely based on their echo characteristics, for certain lesions histological examination is necessary. Sometimes histology can be inconclusive, especially for smaller lesions. Therefore, new methods have been developed in recent years to assist decision making, such as contrast enhanced endosonography, EUS elastography, and artificial intelligence systems. In this narrative review we provide a complete overview of the gastric SELs and summarize the new data of the last ten years concerning the diagnostic advances of endosonography on this topic.

Influence of Frailty in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Biliary Stone Disease: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreaticobiliary diseases are common in the elderly. To this end, frailty represents a state of vulnerability that should be considered when assessing the risks and benefits of therapeutic endoscopic procedures. We aim to determine the rate of readmissions and clinical outcomes using the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). METHODS: Using the National Readmissions Database, we identified patients with an admission diagnosis of cholangitis with obstructive stone from 2016 to 2019. Patients were determined to be of low frailty risk with a score of < 5, while patients of medium to high frailty risk had a score of > 5. RESULTS: During the study period, 5751 patients were identified with acute cholangitis with obstructing stone. Mean age of index admissions was 69.4 years and 51.8% were female. From the total cohort, 5119 (89.2%) patients underwent therapeutic ERCP, 38.0% (n = 1947) of whom were regarded as frail (risk score > 5). Following ERCP, frail patients had a less but statistically insignificant readmission rate compared to non-frail patients (2.76% vs 4.05%, p = 0.450). However, compared to non-frail patients, frail patients experienced higher post-ERCP complications (6.20% vs 14.63%, p < 0.001). Frail patients were more likely to have longer lengths of stay, higher hospital cost, and mortality risk. CONCLUSION: ERCP is not a risk factor for readmission among frail patients. However, frail patients are at higher risk for procedure-related complications, healthcare utilization, and mortality.

Recent Developments in the Field of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Pancreatic Lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of both solid and cystic pancreatic lesions and in the staging of patients with pancreatic cancer through its use for tissue and fluid sampling. Additionally, in cases of precancerous lesions, EUS-guided therapy can also be provided. This review aims to describe the most recent developments regarding the role of EUS in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic lesions. Moreover, complementary EUS imaging modalities, the role of artificial intelligence, new devices, and modalities for tissue acquisition, and techniques for EUS-guided treatment are discussed.

Performance and Safety of EUS Ablation Techniques for Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) represent an increasingly diagnosed condition with significant burden to patients' lives and medical resources. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) ablation techniques have been utilized to treat focal pancreatic lesions. This systematic review with meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy of EUS ablation on PCL in terms of complete or partial response and safety. METHODS: A systematic search in Medline, Cochrane and Scopus databases was performed in April 2023 for studies assessing the performance of the various EUS ablation techniques. The primary outcome was complete cyst resolution, defined as cyst disappearance in follow-up imaging. Secondary outcomes included partial resolution (reduction in PCL size), and adverse events rate. A subgroup analysis was planned to evaluate the impact of the available ablation techniques (ethanol, ethanol/paclitaxel, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and lauromacrogol) on the results. Meta-analyses using a random effects model were conducted and the results were reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: Fifteen studies (840 patients) were eligible for analysis. Complete cyst resolution after EUS ablation was achieved in 44% of cases (95%CI: 31-57; 352/767; I2 = 93.7%), and the respective partial response rate was 30% (95%CI: 20-39; 206/767; I2 = 86.1%). Adverse events were recorded in 14% (95%CI: 8-20; 164/840; I2 = 87.2%) of cases, rated as mild in 10% (95%CI: 5-15; 128/840; I2 = 86.7%), and severe in 4% (95%CI: 3-5; 36/840; I2 = 0%). The subgroup analysis for the primary outcome revealed rates of 70% (95%CI: 64-76; I2 = 42.3%) for ethanol/paclitaxel, 44% (95%CI: 33-54; I2= 0%) for lauromacrogol, 32% (95%CI: 27-36; I2 = 88.4%) for ethanol, and 13% (95%CI: 4-22; I2 = 95.8%) for RFA. Considering adverse events, the ethanol-based subgroup rated the highest percentage (16%; 95%CI: 13-20; I2 = 91.0%). CONCLUSION: EUS ablation of pancreatic cysts provides acceptable rates of complete resolution and a low incidence of severe adverse events, with chemoablative agents yielding higher performance rates.

Impact of center and endoscopist ERCP volume on ERCP outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist experience and center volume might be associated with ERCP outcomes, as in other fields of endoscopy and in surgery. An effort to assess this relationship is important to improve practice. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate these comparative data and to assess the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP procedure outcomes. METHODS: We performed a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus through March 2022. Volume classification included high- and low-volume (HV and LV) endoscopists and centers. The primary outcome was the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP success. Secondary outcomes were the overall adverse event (AE) rate and the specific AE rate. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data synthesis was obtained by direct meta-analyses using a random-effects model; results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 6833 relevant publications, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Procedure success was higher among HV endoscopists (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.59-2.06; I2 = 57%) and in HV centers (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.22-2.57; I2 = 67%). The overall AE rate was lower for procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .71; 95% CI, .61-.82; I2 = 38%) and in HV centers (OR, .70; 95% CI, .51-.97; I2 = 92%). Bleeding was less frequent in procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .67; 95% CI, .48-.95; I2 = 37%) but did not differ based on center volume (OR, .68; 95% CI, .24-1.90; I2 = 89%). No statistical differences were detected concerning pancreatitis, cholangitis, and perforation rates. CONCLUSIONS: HV endoscopists and centers provide higher ERCP success rates with fewer overall AEs, especially bleeding, compared with respective LV comparators.