Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29093736›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2017

What Is the Value of the Learning Curve in Endoscopic Balloon Dilatation of the Major Papilla?

Eduardo Tavio-Hernandez, Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros, Enrique Rodriguez-Santiago, Juan Angel Gonzalez-Martin, Jose Ramón Foruny-Olcina, Vicente Benita-Leon, Victor Defarges-Pons, Daniel Boixeda-Miquel, Agustin Albillos-Martínez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Eduardo Tavio-HernandezEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Enrique Vazquez-SequeirosEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4372-3893
Enrique Rodriguez-SantiagoEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Juan Angel Gonzalez-MartinEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Jose Ramón Foruny-OlcinaEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Vicente Benita-LeonEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Victor Defarges-PonsEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Daniel Boixeda-MiquelEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Agustin Albillos-MartínezEndoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEndoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) is an alternative for the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones. Existing evidence of factors associated with its outcomes is contradictory.

objectiveTo identify predictors (including the experience of an endoscopist) of success and adverse events in EPLBD.

methodsWe reviewed the first 200 EPLBD with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) performed at our center. Demographic, clinical, and anatomic variables were studied, as well as the performance characteristics, correlating them with individual and group experience.

resultsGlobal success was obtained in 87% of cases, and adverse events occurred in 16% of cases. Success was associated with stone size, CBD diameter, and the need to perform mechanical lithotripsy (ML). Despite that adverse events were not univariately associated with any factor, severe adverse events were more likely to occur in stones > 13.5 mm. Multivariate analysis which disclosed success was higher when ML was not required and stones were < 13.5 mm. It also showed that no factor was associated with adverse events or their severity. No differences were found on success or adverse events that could be directly related to experience.

conclusionsSuccess of EPLBD-EST is higher in stones < 13.5 mm and when ML is not required. Experience does not appear to play a major role.

Identifiers

PMID29093736
PMCPMC5603744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.