Skip to main content

Table 3 subgroup and sensitivity analysis of the effect of GTN on the prevention of PEP

From: A meta-analysis for the effect of prophylactic GTN on the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis and on the successful rate of cannulation of bile ducts

Trials Subgroup(N) Odds ratio (95%) CI Z P value Heterogeneity
      x2 P I2,%
The overall effect of GTN on the incidence of PEP
all forms 7 studies(n = 1814) 0.56 [0.40, 0.79] 3.29 0.001 6.09 0.41 1.4
Different forms
sublingual form 2 studies(n = 260) 0.34 [0.16, 0.75] 2.70 0.007 0.24 0.62 0
transdermal form 3 studies(n = 1266) 0.64 [0.40, 1.01] 1.93 0.05 3.77 0.15 47.0
Different definition of PEP
the same criteria 5 studies(n = 1554) 0.64 [0.43, 0.94] 2.25 0.02 3.80 0.43 0
Sudhindran S 1 studies(n = 186) 0.39 [0.15, 1.00]      
Hao JY 1 studies(n = 74) 0.26 [0.06, 1.04]      
Different incidence of PEP in the placebo group(10.4% as the cut-off point to stratify the trials)
low incidence 3 studies(n = 1204) 0.75 [0.47, 1.20] 1.22 0.22 1.42 0.49 0
high incidence 4 studies(n = 610) 0.40 [0.24, 0.67] 3.44 0.0006 1.88 0.60 0