Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33087766›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2020

Assessment of the course of acute pancreatitis in the light of aetiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Emese Réka Bálint, Gabriella Fűr, Lóránd Kiss, Dávid István Németh, Alexandra Soós, Péter Hegyi, Zsolt Szakács, Benedek Tinusz, Péter Varjú, Áron Vincze and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emese Réka BálintDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Gabriella FűrDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Lóránd KissDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Dávid István NémethInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Alexandra SoósInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Péter HegyiInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Zsolt SzakácsInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Benedek TinuszInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Péter VarjúFirst Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Áron VinczeFirst Department of Medicine, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Bálint ErőssInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
József CzimmerInstitute for Translational Medicine and Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Zoltán SzepesFirst Department of Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Gábor VargaDepartment of Oral Biology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Zoltán RakonczayDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary. rakonczay.zoltan@med.u-szeged.hu.
University of Pecs · HUUniversity of Szeged · HUSemmelweis University · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main causes of acute pancreatitis (AP) are biliary disease, alcohol consumption, hypertriglyceridaemia (HTG) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of these aetiological factors on the severity and outcome of AP. Pubmed and Embase were searched between 01/01/2012 and 31/05/2020. Included articles involved adult alcoholic, biliary, HTG- or post-ERCP AP (PAP) patients. Primary outcome was severity, secondary outcomes were organ failures, intensive care unit admission, recurrence rate, pancreatic necrosis, mortality, length of hospital stay, pseudocyst, fluid collection and systematic inflammatory response syndrome. Data were analysed from 127 eligible studies. The risk for non-mild (moderately severe and severe) condition was the highest in HTG-induced AP (HTG-AP) followed by alcoholic AP (AAP), biliary AP (BAP) and PAP. Recurrence rate was significantly lower among BAP vs. HTG-AP or AAP patients (OR = 2.69 and 2.98, 95% CI 1.55-4.65 and 2.22-4.01, respectively). Mortality rate was significantly greater in HTG-AP vs. AAP or BAP (OR = 1.72 and 1.50, 95% CI 1.04-2.84 and 0.96-2.35, respectively), pancreatic necrosis occurred more frequently in AAP than BAP patients (OR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.08-2.30). Overall, there is a potential association between aetiology and the development and course of AP. HTG-AP is associated with the highest number of complications. Furthermore, AAP is likely to be more severe than BAP or PAP. Greater emphasis should be placed on determining aetiology on admission.

Indexed as

Alcohol DrinkingAzocinesBiliary Tract DiseasesCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeFemaleHumansHypertriglyceridemiaMalePancreatitisPancreatitis, Acute NecrotizingRecurrenceSeverity of Illness IndexAzocinesorigen

Identifiers

PMID33087766
PMCPMC7578029
OpenAlexW3094587116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.