Endoscopic or surgical intervention for painful obstructive chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy and surgery are the treatment modalities of choice for patients with chronic pancreatitis and dilated pancreatic duct (obstructive chronic pancreatitis). Physicians face, without clear consensus, the choice between endoscopy or surgery for this group of patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the effects and complications of surgical and endoscopic interventions in the management of pain for obstructive chronic pancreatitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases in The Cochrane Library: CENTRAL (2014, Issue 2), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2014, Issue 2), and DARE (2014, Issue 2). We also searched the following databases up to 25 March 2014: MEDLINE (from 1950), Embase (from 1980), and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S) (from 1990). We performed a cross-reference search. Two review authors independently performed the selection of trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of endoscopic or surgical interventions in obstructive chronic pancreatitis. We included trials comparing endoscopic versus surgical interventions as well as trials comparing either endoscopic or surgical interventions to conservative treatment (i.e. non-invasive treatment modalities). We included relevant trials irrespective of blinding, the number of participants randomised, and the language of the article. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two authors independently extracted data from the articles. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included trials and requested additional information from study authors in the case of missing data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three eligible trials. Two trials compared endoscopic intervention with surgical intervention and included a total of 111 participants: 55 in the endoscopic group and 56 in the surgical group. Compared with the endoscopic group, the surgical group had a higher proportion of participants with pain relief, both at middle/long-term follow-up (two to five years: risk ratio (RR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 2.15) and long-term follow-up (≥ five years, RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.05). Surgical intervention resulted in improved quality of life and improved preservation of exocrine pancreatic function at middle/long-term follow-up (two to five years), but not at long-term follow-up (≥ 5 years). No differences were found in terms of major post-interventional complications or mortality, although the number of participants did not allow for this to be reliably evaluated. One trial, including 32 participants, compared surgical intervention with conservative treatment: 17 in the surgical group and 15 in the conservative group. The trial showed that surgical intervention resulted in a higher percentage of participants with pain relief and better preservation of pancreatic function. The trial had methodological limitations, and the number of participants was relatively small. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis and dilated pancreatic duct, this review shows that surgery is superior to endoscopy in terms of pain relief. Morbidity and mortality seem not to differ between the two intervention modalities, but the small trials identified do not provide sufficient power to detect the small differences expected in this outcome.Regarding the comparison of surgical intervention versus conservative treatment, this review has shown that surgical intervention in an early stage of chronic pancreatitis is a promising approach in terms of pain relief and pancreatic function. Other trials need to confirm these results because of the methodological limitations and limited number of participants assessed in the present evidence.

Endoscopic or surgical intervention for painful obstructive chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy and surgery are the treatment modalities of choice in patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis. Physicians face the decision between endoscopy and surgery for this group of patients, without clear consensus. OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the effectiveness and complications of surgical and endoscopic interventions in the management of pain for obstructive chronic pancreatitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index; and performed a cross-reference search. Two review authors performed the selection of trials independently. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating endoscopic or surgical interventions for obstructive chronic pancreatitis. All trials were included irrespective of blinding, number of patients randomised and language of the article. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data from the articles. The methodological quality of included trials was evaluated. Authors were requested additional information in the case of missing data. MAIN RESULTS: We screened 2082 publications and identified three eligible trials. Two trials compared endoscopic intervention to surgical intervention. These included a total of 111 patients, 55 in the endoscopic group and 56 in the surgical group. A higher proportion of patients with pain relief was found in the surgical group compared to the endoscopic group (partial or complete pain relief: RR 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 2.37; complete pain relief: RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.18 to 5.09). Surgical intervention resulted in improved quality of life and improved preservation of exocrine pancreatic function in one trial. The number of patients did not allow for a reliable evaluation of morbidity and mortality between the two treatment modalities. One trial compared surgical intervention to conservative treatment. It included 32 patients: 17 in the surgical group and 15 in the conservative group. The trial showed that surgical intervention resulted in a higher percentage of patients with pain relief and better preservation of pancreatic function. The trial had methodological limitations and the number of patients was relatively small. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis and dilated pancreatic duct, this review showed that surgery is superior to endoscopy in terms of pain control. Morbidity and mortality seemed not to differ between the two intervention modalities, but the small trials identified do not provide sufficient power to detect the small differences expected in this outcome.Regarding the comparison of surgical intervention versus conservative treatment, this review has shown that surgical intervention in an early stage of chronic pancreatitis seems to be a promising approach in terms of pain control and pancreatic function. Confirmation of these results is needed in other trials due to the methodological limitations and limited number of patients of the present evidence.