Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32925738›Full record

Observational studyMedicine2020

Efficacy and safety of ERCP in patients with gastroesophageal varices.

Junbo Hong, Wei Zuo, Anjiang Wang, Liang Zhu, Xiaodong Zhou, Xiaojiang Zhou, Guohua Li, Zhijian Liu, Pi Liu, Hao Zhen and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Junbo HongDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Wei ZuoDepartments of Respiratory Medicine.
Anjiang WangDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Liang ZhuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Xiaodong ZhouDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Xiaojiang ZhouDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Guohua LiDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Zhijian LiuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Pi LiuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Hao ZhenDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Yong ZhuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Jiuhong MaDigestive Endoscopy Center.
Jianhui YuanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Endoscopy Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.
Xu ShuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Yin ZhuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Nonghua LuDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Youxiang ChenDepartments of Gastroenterology.
Nanchang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Addressing pancreaticobiliary disorders concomitant with gastroesophageal varices remains challenging. The goal of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices.We retrospectively analyzed the data of consecutive patients with gastroesophageal varices who underwent ERCP.Two hundred seventy ERCP procedures were performed on 208 patients. The overall technical success rate was 98.5%, and no difference was found between cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients (98.7% vs 97.7%, P = .511); of these, endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage, endoscopic metal biliary endoprosthesis placement, endoscopic retrograde pancreatic drainage, and stone extraction were conducted in 173/270 (64.1%), 27/270 (10.0%), 26/270 (9.6%), and 116/270 (43.0%) cases, respectively. Endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage and stone extraction were more frequently performed in cirrhotic cases (67.7% versus 45.5%, P = .005; 46.5% versus 25.0%, P = .009, respectively), while the noncirrhotic group had significantly higher rates of endoscopic metal biliary endoprosthesis placement (31.8% versus 5.8%, P = .000) and endoscopic retrograde pancreatic drainage (18.2% versus 8.0%, P = .036) than the cirrhotic group. The overall rate of adverse events was 21.1%, including fever (6.7%), post-ERCP pancreatitis ( 3.0%), hyperamylasemia (6.3%), duodenal papilla bleeding (3.3%), cardiac mucosal laceration (1.1%), and perforation (0.4%). No differences in any of the adverse events were found between the 2 groups. Additionally, gastroesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 1 patient with grade III varices 7 days after ERCP.ERCP may be effective and safe for patients with gastroesophageal varices, irrespective of the etiologies caused by liver cirrhosis.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeEsophageal and Gastric VaricesFemaleHumansHypertension, PortalLiver CirrhosisMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID32925738
PMCPMC7489748
OpenAlexW3085970754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.