Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31875953›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of surgery2020

Recurrence of idiopathic acute pancreatitis after cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

D S Umans, N D Hallensleben, R C Verdonk, S A W Bouwense, P Fockens, H C van Santvoort, R P Voermans, M G Besselink, M J Bruno, J E van Hooft and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06124989 (A Novel Machine Learning Model for the Prediction of Relapse of Acute Biliary Pancreatitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

NCT06124989 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Machine Learning Model for the Prediction of Relapse of Acute Biliary Pancreatitis (Machine learnINg for the rElapse Risk eValuation in Acute Biliary Pancreatitis - MINERVA)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of CagliariRan2024 to 2025Enrolled430ConditionsAcute Pancreatitis, Pancreatitis Due to Gallstones, Pancreatitis Biliary, Pancreatitis RelapsingArmsMINERVA Machine Learning model
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Endoscopic Management of Recurrent Acute Pancreatitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Turkish Society of Gastroenterology: Pancreas Working Group, Acute Pancreatitis Committee Consensus Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Natural Course of Common Bile Duct Microlithiasis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023
    Article
  17. What has changed? The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of acute biliary pancreatitis.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

D S UmansDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4872-8389
N D HallenslebenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
R C VerdonkDepartment of Gastroenterology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
S A W BouwenseDepartment of Surgery, MUMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
P FockensDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
H C van SantvoortDepartment of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
R P VoermansDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
M G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
M J BrunoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
J E van HooftDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group
Amsterdam Neuroscience · NLErasmus MC · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLSt. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NLUniversity of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOccult biliary disease has been suggested as a frequent underlying cause of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Cholecystectomy has been proposed as a strategy to prevent recurrent IAP. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of cholecystectomy in reducing the risk of recurrent IAP.

methodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for studies including patients with IAP treated by cholecystectomy, with data on recurrence of pancreatitis. Studies published before 1980 or including chronic pancreatitis and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome was recurrence rate. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were undertaken to calculate risk ratios using a random-effects model with the inverse-variance method.

resultsOverall, ten studies were included, of which nine were used in pooled analyses. The study population consisted of 524 patients with 126 cholecystectomies. Of these 524 patients, 154 (29·4 (95 per cent c.i. 25·5 to 33·3) per cent) had recurrent disease. The recurrence rate was significantly lower after cholecystectomy than after conservative management (14 of 126 (11·1 per cent) versus 140 of 398 (35·2 per cent); risk ratio 0·44, 95 per cent c.i. 0·27 to 0·71). Even in patients in whom IAP was diagnosed after more extensive diagnostic testing, including endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, the recurrence rate appeared to be lower after cholecystectomy (4 of 36 (11 per cent) versus 42 of 108 (38·9 per cent); risk ratio 0·41, 0·16 to 1·07).

conclusionCholecystectomy after an episode of IAP reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis. This implies that current diagnostics are insufficient to exclude a biliary cause.

Indexed as

Postoperative ComplicationsAcute DiseaseCholecystectomyHumansPancreatitisRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID31875953
PMCPMC7003758
OpenAlexW2997668031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.