Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24719597›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology & hepatology2013

Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: how to avoid and manage them.

Nicholas M Szary, Firas H Al-Kawas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Timing of intervention: Assessing earlyWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2026
    Article
  10. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography of geriatric patients with cholangitis: A single-center experience in central Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. IDCases · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas M SzaryDr. Szary is an Advanced Endoscopy Fellow and Dr. Al-Kawas is a Professor of Medicine and Chief of Endoscopy in the Division of Gastroenterology at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, DC.
Firas H Al-KawasDr. Szary is an Advanced Endoscopy Fellow and Dr. Al-Kawas is a Professor of Medicine and Chief of Endoscopy in the Division of Gastroenterology at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, DC.
Georgetown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a therapeutic procedure used to treat problems associated with biliary and pancreatic diseases. The benefits of ERCP over surgical treatment are well documented; however, complications including infection, pancreatitis, hemorrhage, and perforation can occur even in expert hands. Several factors, such as patient selection, skill of the operator, and the complexity of the procedure, can add to the intrinsic risks of ERCP This review outlines the current knowledge regarding ERCP complications and solutions for improved outcomes.

Indexed as

ERCPpost-ERCP hemorrhagepost-ERCP infectionpost-ERCP pancreatitispost-ERCP perforation

Identifiers

PMID24719597
PMCPMC3980992
OpenAlexW1569829309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.