ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2007
Early successes and late failures in the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- NSAIDs do not reduce severity among post-ERCP pancreatitis patients.Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.] · 2024Pooled it
- Immune Inhibitory Properties and Therapeutic Prospects of Transforming Growth Factor-Beta and Interleukin 10 in Autoimmune Hepatitis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Indomethacin for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis: is it the magic bullet?World journal of gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Can endoscopic palliation of large neoplasm increase the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography?Surgical endoscopy · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The only way to prevent this complication is to avoid an ERCP all together. Because of the risks involved, a careful consideration should be given to the indication for ERCP and the potential risk/benefit ratio of the test. Once a decision to perform an ERCP is made, the procedure should be carried out with meticulous care by an experienced endoscopist, and with a minimum of pancreatic duct opacification. Several pharmacologic agents have been tested, but to date the most important method of reducing post ERCP pancreatitis is the placement of pancreatic stent. Pancreatic stents should be placed in all patients at high risk of this complication such as those undergoing pancreatic sphincterotomy, pancreatic duct manipulation and intervention, and patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Pancreatic stents should be also considered in patients requiring precut sphincterotomy to gain biliary access.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.