ArticleThe Kobe journal of medical sciences2017
History of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis and Acute Pancreatitis as Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis.
Article in The Kobe journal of medical sciences, 2017. 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.
- Cracking the code of post-ERCP pancreatitis: predictors, prevention, and proven strategies from 3323 surgeon-led procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pancreatitis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Predictors of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (P.E.P.) in Choledochal Lithiasis Extraction.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Acute Pancreatitis: Diagnosis and Treatment.Drugs · 2022Review
- Pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A narrative review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious pancreatitis is a definite patient-related risk factor for pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP pancreatitis: PEP). However, the effects of differences in the history of PEP and acute pancreatitis on the occurrence of PEP have not been fully investigated. We examined the relationship between previous PEP or previous acute pancreatitis and procedural factors associated with PEP.
methodsClinical data on 1,334 consecutive patients undergoing ERCP between April 2006 and June 2010 were collected. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between PEP and the cannulation time (<15 min vs. ≥15 min) or total procedure time (<30 min vs. ≥30 min) according to previous pancreatitis (previous PEP: pPEP or previous acute pancreatitis: pAP), with adjustments for clinical characteristics.
resultsLonger cannulation times (≥15 min) correlated with the occurrence of PEP in the pPEP group (OR=2.97; 95% CI=1.10 to 8.43, P=0.03) and in patients without previous pancreatitis (non-preP group) (OR=2.43; 95% CI=1.41 to 4.14, P= 0.002), but not in the pAP group (OR=2.78; 95% CI=0.50 to 22.42, P= 0.25). In contrast, longer procedure times correlated with the occurrence of PEP in the pAP group (OR=3.93; 95% CI=1.11 to 16.5, P= 0.03), but not in the pPEP group (OR=2.79; 95% CI=0.92 to 9.18, P= 0.068) or non-preP group (OR=0.71; 95% CI=0.39 to 1.24, P= 0.23).
conclusionsA higher risk of PEP with previous PEP was associated with longer cannulation times, whereas a higher risk of PEP with previous acute pancreatitis was associated with longer procedure times.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29434167PMC5824925What 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.