Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33506456›Full record

SynthesisEndoscopy2022

Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE): a systematic review describing the outcomes, adverse events, and knowledge gaps.

Shaurya Prakash, B Joseph Elmunzer, Erin M Forster, Gregory A Cote, Robert A Moran

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Anatomical Alterations and Endoscopic Strategies After Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaurya PrakashDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
B Joseph ElmunzerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Erin M ForsterDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Gregory A CoteDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Robert A MoranDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

Proteomics CoreP30DK123704 · NIDDK · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI DON C. ROCKEY · 2020 to 2026
$8.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK123704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE) has emerged as a viable completely endoscopic method for performing pancreaticobiliary interventions in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass anatomy. The aims of this systematic review were: (1) to describe the indications, outcomes, and complications of EDGE; and (2) to identify deficiencies in our knowledge of important technical approaches and clinical outcomes.

methodsA systematic review was conducted via comprehensive searches of Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane to identify studies focusing on EDGE outcomes. Simple descriptive statistics were derived from case series only. Case reports were only included to qualitatively describe additional indications, techniques, and adverse events.

resultsThe initial search identified 2143 abstracts. Nine case series and eight case reports were included. In the nine case series, 169 patients underwent EDGE. The technical success rate was 99 % (168 /169) for gastrogastrostomy/jejunogastrostomy creation and 98 % (166 /169) for subsequent ERCP. Minor adverse events specifically related to EDGE occurred in 18 % (31/169) and included intraprocedural stent migration/malposition (n = 27) and abdominal pain (n = 4). Moderate adverse events specific to EDGE occurred in 5 % (9/169): including bleeding (2 %), persistent fistula (1 %), and perforation (1 %). Severe adverse events occurred in one patient with a perforation requiring surgery. Deficiency in reporting on the clinical significance of adverse events was identified.

conclusionBased on limited observational data, in expert hands, EDGE has a high rate of technical success and an acceptable rate of adverse events. As a novel procedure, many knowledge gaps need to be addressed to inform the design of meaningful comparative studies and guide informed consent.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeGastric BypassEndosonographyHumansRetrospective StudiesStents

Identifiers

PMID33506456
PMCPMC8783372
OpenAlexW3123698869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.