ArticleMiddle East journal of digestive diseases2013
Evaluation of N-acetyl Cysteine for the Prevention of Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: A Prospective Double Blind Randomized Pilot Study.
Article in Middle East journal of digestive diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of N-Acetylcysteine in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Antioxidant drugs to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: What does evidence suggest?World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Pooled it
- Dynamic thiol/disulphide homeostasis in acute pancreatitis.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2018Trial
- N‑acetylcysteine for post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Targeting Oxidative Stress in Acute Pancreatitis: A Critical Review of Antioxidant Strategies.Nutrients · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute pancreatitis is the most common serious complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) that can occasionally be fatal. Multiple drugs have been examined for the prevention of this side effect, with generally uncertain results. This study is an effort to prevent this complication by the use of oral N-acetyl cysteine (NAC).
methodsA total of 100 patients who were candidates for ERCP were divided randomly into two groups. In the NAC (N) group, patients received 1200 mg NAC with 150 cc water orally 2 h before ERCP. In the placebo (P) group, 150 cc water was prescribed as a placebo. We measured serum amylase and lipase levels before and 24 h after ERCP. The prevalence of pancreatitis and duration of admission in each group were determined and compared.
resultsIn group N there were 5 (10%) cases of pancreatitis, whereas in group P there were 14 (28%) cases, which was significant (risk reduction ratio: 2.8; p=0.02).The average admission time was 1.16±0.55 days in group N and 1.18±0.44 days in group P, which was not significant.
conclusionThere were significant differences in the prevalence of acute pancreatitis between the two groups. In addition, the number of need to treat (NNT) consisted of five cases for NAC. With regards to the above results and the safety profile of NAC, it could be used as a therapeutic agent for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. We recommend that the results of this study be verified by additional clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24829665PMC3990130W2159201075What 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.