Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26078561›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts.

Enver Zerem, Goran Hauser, Svjetlana Loga-Zec, Suad Kunosić, Predrag Jovanović, Dino Crnkić

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Chronic Pancreatitis: Role of Endoscopic Procedures.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Enver ZeremEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Goran HauserEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Svjetlana Loga-ZecEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Suad KunosićEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Predrag JovanovićEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Dino CrnkićEnver Zerem, Predrag Jovanović, Department of Gastroenterology, University Clinical Center Tuzla, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
University of Sarajevo · BAAcademy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina · BAUniversity Clinical Center Tuzla · BAUniversity of Tuzla · BA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A pancreatic pseudocyst (PPC) is typically a complication of acute and chronic pancreatitis, trauma or pancreatic duct obstruction. The diagnosis of PPC can be made if an acute fluid collection persists for 4 to 6 wk and is enveloped by a distinct wall. Most PPCs regress spontaneously and require no treatment, whereas some may persist and progress until complications occur. The decision whether to treat a patient who has a PPC, as well as when and with what treatment modalities, is a difficult one. PPCs can be treated with a variety of methods: percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD), endoscopic transpapillary or transmural drainage, laparoscopic surgery, or open pseudocystoenterostomy. The recent trend in the management of symptomatic PPC has moved toward less invasive approaches such as endoscopic- and image-guided PCD. The endoscopic approach is suitable because most PPCs lie adjacent to the stomach. The major advantage of the endoscopic approach is that it creates a permanent pseudocysto-gastric track with no spillage of pancreatic enzymes. However, given the drainage problems, the monitoring, catheter manipulation and the analysis of cystic content are very difficult or impossible to perform endoscopically, unlike in the PCD approach. Several conditions must be met to achieve the complete obliteration of the cyst cavity. Pancreatic duct anatomy is an important factor in the prognosis of the treatment outcome, and the recovery of disrupted pancreatic ducts is the main prognostic factor for successful treatment of PPC, regardless of the treatment method used. In this article, we review and evaluate the minimally invasive approaches in the management of PPCs.

Indexed as

DrainageEndoscopy, Digestive SystemHumansLaparoscopyPancreatic PseudocystPredictive Value of TestsTreatment OutcomeComplicationsDrainageOutcomesPseudocystTreatment

Identifiers

PMID26078561
PMCPMC4462725
OpenAlexW2336227318

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.