Observational studyDigestive diseases and sciences2021
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects of Enhanced Personal Protective Equipment.
Observational study in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of COVID-19 Infection on Pancreato-Biliary Diseases Requiring Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Observational
- Obstructive jaundice treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary care center in Serbia.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPersonal protective equipment (PPE) decreases the risk of disease contagion, and because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced PPE (EPPE) is widely used during endoscopic procedures including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of EPPE on ERCP success parameters compared to standard PPE (SPPE).
methodsERCP procedures were evaluated retrospectively and ERCP outcomes were compared for similar time periods as before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary outcomes were cannulation time, number of cannulation attempts, cannulation success rate, difficult cannulation rate, undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rate, ERCP-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay.
resultsThree hundred and eighty ERCP procedures were examined. One hundred and fifty-nine procedures were excluded due to missing data, previous sphincterotomy or altered anatomy. Of the final eligible sample size of 221 ERCPs, 93 were performed using SPPE and 128 were performed under EPPE. Indications of ERCP and demographic parameters were similar between groups. The majority of the ERCP cases included were for benign biliary obstruction of common bile duct stones (88.7%). No significant differences were detected in overall technical success (91.4% vs 92.2%, p = 0.832), cannulation success rates (94.6% vs 96.8%, p = 0.403), cannulation times (median times of both groups were 3 min, p = 0.824), difficult cannulation rates (37.6% vs 33.6%, p = 0.523), undesired pancreatic duct cannulation rates (29% vs 22.7%, p = 0.593), number of cannulation attempts (2.80 vs 2.71, p = 0.731), ERCP-related adverse events (9.7% vs 10.9%, p = 0.762), and length of hospital stay (6.63 vs 6.92 days, p = 0.768) between SPPE and EPPE groups, respectively.
conclusionBiliary obstructions of common bile duct stones were the major indication of ERCP in the current study. The use of EPPE had no negative effects on ERCP performance in this patient group. ERCP can be effectively performed under EPPE.
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.