ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Endoscopic treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis complicated with pancreaticocolonic fistula.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Black hole in WONderland: endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis complicated by giant colonic fistula.Endoscopy · 2026Article
- Characteristics and Incidence of Colon Complication in Necrotizing pancreatitis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2023Article
- Endoscopic treatment of pancreaticopleural fistulas.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Spontaneous regression of asymptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2019Article
- The role of endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct disruption in patients with walled-off pancreatic necrosis.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPancreaticocolonic fistulas (PCFs) are serious complication of acute pancreatitis related with high mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency and safety of endoscopic treatment in patients with walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) complicated with PCF.
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of results and complications in the group of 226 patients, who underwent endoscopic treatment of symptomatic WOPN between years 2001 and 2016 in the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology of Medical University of Gdańsk.
resultsPCF was recognized in 21/226 (9.29%) patients. Transmural drainage was performed in 20/21 (95.24%) patients. Transpapillary drainage was used in 2/21 (9.52) patients. The mean time since the start of endotherapy to the diagnosis of a fistulas was 9 (3-21) days. Fluoroscopic nasocystic tube-check imaging of an existing drain was the initial imaging diagnosis of a PCF in 19/21 (90.48%) patients. The mean duration of endoscopic drainage of WOPN was 39.29 (15-87) days. Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 10/21 (47.62%) patients and most of them were treated conservatively. Three patients required surgical treatment. One patient died during endotherapy. The closure of PCF was confirmed via imaging in 17/21 (80.95%) patients. The average time since the recognition till the closure of PCF was 21 (14-48) days. Complete therapeutic success of WOPN complicated with PCF was reached in 16/21 (76.19%) patients. Long-term success of endoscopic treatment was achieved in 15/21 (71.43%) patients.
conclusionsEndoscopic treatment of patients with WOPN complicated with PCF is an effective method with an acceptable number of complications. The complete regression of the WOPN may lead to spontaneous closure of pancreaticocolonic fistulas.
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.