ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Clinical Evaluation of a Newly Developed Guidewire for Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative mechanical profiling of 12 ERCP guidewires: Toward evidence-based device selection.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilatation With or Without Endoscopic Sphincterotomy in the Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Review
- Structural factors influencing the clinical performance of 0.025-inch guidewires for pancreatobiliary endoscopy: An experimental study.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Comparison of guidewires for successful cannulation of biliary stenosis and targeting of biliary branches in ERCP.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Predictive value of the Fibrosis-4 index in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2022Article
- Recent Advances in Pancreato-Biliary Endoscopic Intervention: How to Resolve Unmet Needs in Pancreato-Biliary Diseases Endoscopically.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe guidewire (GW) plays an important role in pancreatobiliary endoscopy. GW quality is a critical factor in the effectiveness and efficiency of pancreatobiliary endoscopy. In this study, we evaluate a new 0.025 inch multipurpose endoscopic GW: the M-Through.
methodsOur study was a multicenter retrospective analysis. We enrolled patients who underwent endoscopic procedures using the M-Through between May 2018 and April 2020. Patients receiving the following endoscopic treatments were enrolled: common bile duct (CBD) stone extraction, endoscopic drainage for distal and hilar malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), and endoscopic drainage for acute cholecystitis. For each procedure, we examined the rate of success without GW exchange.
resultsA total of 170 patients (80 with CBD stones, 60 with MBO, and 30 with cholecystitis) were enrolled. The rate of completion without GW exchange was 100% for CBD stone extraction, 83.3% for endoscopic drainage for MBO, and 43.3% for endoscopic drainage for cholecystitis. In unsuccessful cholecystitis cases with the original GW manipulator, 1 of 8 cases succeeded in the manipulator exchange. Including 6 cases who changed GW after the manipulator exchange, 11 of 16 cases succeeded in changing GW. There was significant difference in the success rate between the manipulator exchange and GW exchange (
conclusionThe 0.025 inch M-Through can be used for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related procedures efficiently and safely. Our study found high rates of success without GW exchange in all procedures except for endoscopic drainage for cholecystitis. This GW is considered (1) excellent for supportability of device insertion to remove CBD stones; (2) good for seeking the biliary malignant stricture but sometimes need the help of a hydrophilic GW; (3) suboptimal for gallbladder drainage that require a high level of seeking ability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.