ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2022
Disease-Based Risk Stratification of Postendoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis for Common Bile Duct Stones.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomics analysis based on MRCP for predicting post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with common bile duct stones.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Predictive models for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: current strategies and novel perspectives.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Current approaches and questions yet to be resolved for the prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Review
- Factors Predicting Difficult Biliary Cannulation during Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Common Bile Duct Stones.Clinical endoscopy · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk stratification of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) for common bile duct (CBD) stones is needed for clinicians to adequately explain to patients regarding the risk of PEP in advance of ERCP and to proactively take preventive measures in high-risk patients.
aimsTo stratify the risk of PEP for CBD stones based on CBD-related diseases.
methodsA total of 1551 patients with naïve papilla who underwent ERCP for CBD stones were divided into three groups: Group A: asymptomatic CBD stones, Group B: obstructive jaundice and elevated liver test values without cholangitis, and Group C: mild, moderate, and severe cholangitis. We stratified the risk of PEP by comparing its incidence among the three groups using the Holm's method. Furthermore, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching between Group A and the other groups to examine the risk of PEP in Group A.
resultsThe incidence rates in Groups A, B, and C were 13.7%, 7.3%, and 1.8%, respectively. The Holm-adjusted p values between Groups A and B, Groups A and C, and Groups B and C were 0.023, < 0.001, and < 0.001, respectively. Propensity score matching revealed that the incidence of PEP was significantly more in Group A than in the other groups (13.3% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe risk of PEP for CBD stones was stratified into low risk (Group C), intermediate risk (Group B), and high risk (Group A). This simple disease-based risk stratification may be useful to predict the risk of PEP in advance of ERCP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33471253What 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.