Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30535937›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019

The impact of empiric endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy on future gallstone-related complications in patients with non-severe acute biliary pancreatitis whose cholecystectomy was deferred or not performed.

Wiriyaporn Ridtitid, Santi Kulpatcharapong, Panida Piyachaturawat, Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon, Pradermchai Kongkam, Rungsun Rerknimitr

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prophylactic cholecystectomy offers best outcomes following ERCP clearance of common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Etiological treatment of gallstone acute pancreatitis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wiriyaporn RidtitidDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Santi KulpatcharapongDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Panida PiyachaturawatDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Phonthep AngsuwatcharakonDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Pradermchai KongkamDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Rungsun RerknimitrDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand. ercp@live.com.
King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital · THChulalongkorn University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly cholecystectomy (EC) is recommended in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP). In real-life practice, cholecystectomy is frequently deferred due to various reasons and delayed cholecystectomy (DC) is performed instead. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is an alternative to prevent recurrent pancreatitis, however other gallstone-related complications (GCs) may still develop. We aimed to determine the impact of ES on future GCs in patients with non-severe acute biliary pancreatitis whose cholecystectomy was deferred or not performed.

methodsDuring 2006-2016, we included patients with non-severe ABP while those with severe pancreatitis and concurrent cholangitis were excluded. GC events were compared between those who had DC with ES and those who had DC without ES. A similar comparison was made in patients with and without ES who did not receive cholecystectomy.

resultsOf 266 patients with ABP, non-severe ABP was identified in 146. Only 16 (11%) had EC. Of patients with non-severe ABP who underwent DC (n = 88), recurrent ABP in the ES group was lower than those from the non-ES group (2% vs. 17%; p = 0.01). Acute cholecystitis was found in 0%, 6% and 10% of patients with EC, DC and those without cholecystectomy (p = 0.39). Of those who did not undergo cholecystectomy (n = 42), recurrent ABP in the ES group was still lower than the non-ES group (4% vs. 36%; p = 0.006). ES related complications were mild pancreatitis (4%) and post sphincterotomy bleeding (5%).

conclusionsIn patient with non-severe ABP, ES is an alternative to reduce recurrent ABP, however without EC, future cholecystitis may still develop.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyAcute DiseaseAgedCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeFemaleGallstonesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreatitisRetrospective StudiesSphincterotomy, EndoscopicAcute biliary pancreatitisCholecystectomyEndoscopic sphincterotomy

Identifiers

PMID30535937
OpenAlexW2905368429

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.