Evidence Hub

The Prevalence of Pancreas Divisum and Its Association with Pancreatic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Suphamungmee W, Taradolpisut N, Yurasakpong L, Senarai T, Suwannakhan A

Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2026

193,672 participants

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Pancreas divisum (PD) is the most common congenital anomaly of the pancreatic ductal system and has been suggested to contribute to pancreatic pathology. However, its true prevalence and relationship with pancreatic diseases remain debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the global prevalence of PD and evaluate its association with pancreatic disease. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search of Google Scholar, Scopus, and PubMed was conducted to identify studies reporting the prevalence of PD across all populations and diagnostic modalities. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test. Results: A total of 117 studies comprising 193,672 subjects were included. The pooled global prevalence of PD was 11.1% (95% CI: 8.0-14.2%) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 99.96%). PD prevalence was higher among individuals with pancreatic disease (18.7%) compared with cadaveric/autopsy studies (8.8%), healthy individuals (5.6%), and consecutive patients (4.7%). Both complete and incomplete PD were more common in subjects with pancreatic diseases. Among PD subtypes, type I was the most prevalent. Egger's test demonstrated significant publication bias (p Conclusions: PD affects approximately one in ten individuals worldwide and appears more prevalent in patients with pancreatic…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 193,672 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free