ArticleGastroenterology report2017
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with ampullary biopsy vs ERCP alone: a matched-pairs controlled evaluation of outcomes and complications.
Article in Gastroenterology report, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic Management of Ampullary Adenomas: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Readmission rate and complications following biopsy of the ampulla of Vater-A retrospective data analysis.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023Article
- Ampullary Adenocarcinoma: a Mini-Review and a Case Report of a Clinically Stable Disease Patient Treated with Herbal Supplements.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2021Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsBiopsy of the ampulla of Vater may be performed to evaluate for ampullary adenomas, suspected ampullary tumors and immunohistological staining for autoimmune pancreatitis. Ampullary biopsies are commonly performed at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Due to the well-established complication rate following ERCP, the contribution of ampullary biopsy as a potential independent risk factor would require a controlled comparison.
methodsA matched-pairs, case-control analysis was performed for patients undergoing ERCP with or without ampullary biopsy. The analysis involved a retrospective review of adult patients at a tertiary-care center who underwent ampullary biopsies during ERCP compared (via procedural complexity) with a matched control group who underwent ERCP without ampullary biopsies.
resultsOf 159 procedures involving ampullary biopsy, 54 ERCPs that met the inclusion criteria were performed with ampullary biopsy and included in the analysis cohort. This cohort was compared with 54 patients undergoing ERCP without ampullary biopsy, matched by American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) grade of procedural complexity. There were no patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Ampullary biopsies suggested a diagnosis in 75.9% of the procedures including 12 adenomas, 5 adenocarcinomas and 1 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. Including major and minor complications, the overall complication rate with biopsy (9.3%) was equivalent to the complication rate in the control group without ampullary biopsy (9.3%, P>0.99). The incidence of post-procedure pancreatitis was not significantly different between the two groups (5.6% vs 3.7%, P=0.6). Age and pancreatic duct manipulation, but not ampullary biopsy, were associated with complications on multivariate analysis in the study population.
conclusionsAmpullary biopsy performed during ERCP had a high diagnostic yield and was not associated with an increased rate of post-procedure complications or pancreatitis when compared with ERCP alone.
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.