ERCP-Related Adverse Events in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background and aims: While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), there is conflicting data on associated adverse events. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to (1) compare ERCP-related adverse events in patients with and without PSC and (2) determine risk factors for ERCP-related adverse events in PSC.

Methods: Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL were searched between January 1, 2000, and May 12, 2021. Eligible studies included adults with PSC undergoing ERCP and reported at least one ERCP-related adverse event (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation) or an associated risk factor. The risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. Raw event rates were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and then pooled using random-effects models.

Results: Twenty studies met eligibility criteria, of which four were included in a meta-analysis comparing post-ERCP adverse events in patients with PSC (n = 715) to those without PSC (n = 9979). We found a significant threefold increase in the 30-day odds of cholangitis in PSC compared to those without (OR 3.263, 95% CI 1.076-9.896; p=0.037). However, there were no significant differences in post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), bleeding, or perforation. Due to limitations in primary data, only risk factors contributing to PEP could be analyzed. Accidental passage of the guidewire into the pancreatic duct (OR 7.444, 95% CI 3.328-16.651; p < 0.001; I ² = 65.0%) and biliary sphincterotomy (OR 4.802, 95% CI 1.916-12.033; p=0.001; I ² = 73.1%) were associated with higher odds of PEP in a second meta-analysis including five studies.

Conclusions: In the context of limited comparative data and heterogeneity, PSC patients undergoing ERCP have higher odds of cholangitis despite the majority receiving antibiotics. Additionally, accidental wire passage and biliary sphincterotomy increased the odds of PEP. Future studies on ERCP-related risks and preventive strategies are needed.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of study selection according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards.

Figure 2

(a) Forest plot of the individual and combined odds of cholangitis, (b) forest plot of the individual and combined odds of pancreatitis, (c) forest plot of the individual and combined odds of bleeding, and (d) forest plot of the individual and combined odds of perforation.

Figure 3

Forest plot of the individual and combined odds of pancreatitis based on (a) sex, (b) biliary sphincterotomy, and (c) accidental passage of the guidewire into the pancreatic duct.