SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Early routine endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography strategy versus early conservative management strategy in acute gallstone pancreatitis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
71 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 190 citations in OpenAlex.
- AEG-AESPANC-OPGE-SIED-SPG Ibero-Latin American Guidelines on Acute Pancreatitis (iLATAM-AP).United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Guideline
- ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Guideline
- Management of Acute Pancreatitis in the Pediatric Population: A Clinical Report From the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Pancreas Committee.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2018Guideline
- Methodological overview of systematic reviews to establish the evidence base for emergency general surgery.The British journal of surgery · 2017Pooled it
- Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2016.Journal of gastroenterology · 2017Guideline
- Enteral nutrition formulations for acute pancreatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallstone pancreatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Impact of atrial fibrillation in hospitalized patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A nationwide analysis.World journal of methodology · 2025Article
- Impact of acute pancreatitis on the outcomes of cholecystectomy. An observational multicenter retrospective study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Observational
- Role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pancreatitis.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Urgent Endoscopic Biliary Procedures: "Run Like the Wind"?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Turkish Society of Gastroenterology: Pancreas Working Group, Acute Pancreatitis Committee Consensus Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Article
- A retrospective analysis of the clinical efficacy of pancreatic duct stent implantation in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis requiring ERCP.European journal of medical research · 2023Observational
- Performance of European and American Societies of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines for Prediction of Choledocholithiasis in Patients with Acute Biliary Pancreatitis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- What has changed? The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of acute biliary pancreatitis.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2023Article
- Therapeutic outcomes of early and delayed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and percutaneous transhepatic cholangial drainage in patients with obstructive severe acute biliary pancreatitis.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2023Article
- Surgical management of acute pancreatitis: Historical perspectives, challenges, and current management approaches.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
- Revised Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association for Acute Pancreatitis.Gut and liver · 2023Review
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role and timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in acute gallstone pancreatitis remains controversial. A number of clinical trials and meta-analyses have provided conflicting evidence.
objectivesTo systematically review evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the clinical effectiveness and safety of the early routine ERCP strategy compared to the early conservative management with or without selective use of ERCP strategy, based on all important, clinically relevant and standardized outcomes including mortality, local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (Bradley 1993) and by authors of the primary study, and ERCP-related complications in unselected patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS databases and major conference proceedings up to January 2012, using the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model with no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing the early routine ERCP strategy versus the early conservative management with or without selective use of ERCP strategy in patients with suspected acute gallstone pancreatitis. We included studies in which the population with acute gallstone pancreatitis was a subgroup within a larger group of patients. We only included studies involving only a selected subgroup of patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis (actual severe pancreatitis) in subgroup analyses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors conducted study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment independently. Using intention-to-treat analysis with random-effects models, we combined dichotomous data to obtain risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed heterogeneity using the Chi² test and I² statistic. To explore sources of heterogeneity, we conducted a priori subgroup analyses according to predicted severity of pancreatitis, cholangitis, biliary obstruction, time to ERCP in routine ERCP strategy, use of selective ERCP in conservative management strategy, and risk of bias. To assess the robustness of our results, we carried out sensitivity analyses using different summary statistics (RR versus odds ratio (OR)) and meta-analytic models (fixed versus random-effects), and per-protocol analysis. We performed influence analysis by exclusion of each study. MAIN
resultsFive RCTs comprising 644 participants were included in the main analyses. Two additional RCTs, comprising only patients with actual severe acute gallstone pancreatitis, were included only in subgroup analyses. There was statistical heterogeneity among trials for mortality, but not for other outcomes. In unselected patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis, there were no statistically significant differences between the two strategies in mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.03), local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.43; and RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.11 respectively) and by authors of the primary study (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.26; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.09 respectively). The results were robust to sensitivity and influence analyses except for systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification. There was no evidence to suggest that the results were dependent on predicted severity of pancreatitis. Among trials that included patients with cholangitis, the early routine ERCP strategy significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.68), local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.99; and RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.78 respectively) and by authors of the primary study (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87; and RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82 respectively). Among trials that included patients with biliary obstruction, the early routine ERCP strategy was associated with a significant reduction in local complications as defined by authors of the primary study (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91), and a non-significant trend towards reduction of local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.07; and RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.02 respectively) and systemic complications as defined by authors of the primary study (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.01). ERCP complications were infrequent. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis, there is no evidence that early routine ERCP significantly affects mortality, and local or systemic complications of pancreatitis, regardless of predicted severity. Our results, however, provide support for current recommendations that early ERCP should be considered in patients with co-existing cholangitis or biliary obstruction.
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.