SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2019
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): lessons learned from population-based national registries: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Intraoperative Cholangiogram Interpretation for Laparoscopic Transcystic Bile Duct Exploration: Is Concurrence Possible?Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Selective epithelial expression of KRASScientific reports · 2025Article
- XIOSIS: An X-Ray-Based Intra-Operative Image-Guided Platform for Oncology Smart Material Delivery.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2024Article
- Advances in gastrointestinal surgical endoscopy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Review
- Effects of the timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography on liver, bile, and inflammatory indices and cholecysto-choledocholithiasis patient prognoses.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was introduced more than four decades ago as a diagnostic tool for biliary and pancreatic diseases. Currently, ERCP is mainly used as a therapeutic approach to relieve biliary or pancreatic duct obstruction. Clinical practice has been based on a few large reports and some randomized controlled trials. These data are valuable and important, but the external validity of these reports is limited. Implementation into routine practice should be balanced with the knowledge that these studies were conducted under very specific circumstances. This review was undertaken to describe ERCP results from population-based national registries recorded during routine clinical practice.
methodsA systematic literature search of the electronic databases Medline Ovid and Embase was conducted. Eligible papers were selected and data were recorded according to the PRISMA criteria.
resultsThirty-one studies were included: 15 true national population-based and 16 population-level studies. Most studies originated from countries with a governmental public health care system. At least three-quarters of the ERCP procedures are currently therapeutic, and the technical success rate is high (> 90%). The postprocedure 30-day mortality rate ranged between 1 and 5% and was strongly correlated with older age, male sex, emergency admission, and noncancer comorbidities, but exhibited a lower correlation with the annual ERCP volume. Patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis or liver cirrhosis should receive particular attention. The risk of developing a bile duct, liver, or pancreas malignancy after ERCP tended to increase, but endoscopic sphincterotomy did not affect this risk.
conclusionERCP is currently mainly used as a therapeutic approach, and the results are generally likely to improve patients' conditions. A nationwide registry enables better monitoring of routine clinical practice. The collection of valuable information from routine clinical practice in population-based databases may help to improve patient care from best evidence to best practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30863927What 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.