ReviewDer Internist2021
[Interventional endoscopic treatment in acute pancreatitis].
Review in Der Internist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different timing for abdominal paracentesis catheter placement and drainage in severe acute pancreatitis complicated by intra-abdominal fluid accumulation.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Spontaneous Rupture and Hemorrhage of WON: A Case Report.Frontiers in surgery · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute pancreatitis (AP) represents a frequent gastrointestinal diseases. Approximately 80% of patients have a mild course of the disease and conservative treatment is sufficient; however, 20% of patients develop a severe AP with local and systemic complications. This article focuses on the currently recommended endoscopic management of severe AP.
objectiveClassification of AP by the revised Atlanta classification and the occurrence of local or systemic complications. Summary of current evidence with respect to endoscopic management. MATERIAL AND
methodsInspection of the current literature from specialist journals and current guidelines.
resultsThe AP is classified as mild, moderate or severe based on systemic (hypotension, renal failure, lung failure) and/or local complications, such as acute peripancreatic fluid collections (APFC), peripancreatic pseudocysts (PPC), acute necrotic collections (ANC) and walled-off necrosis (WON). In recent years the staged endoscopic treatment of infected ANC, WON and PPC has become established. The initial step is the endoscopic ultrasound-guided puncture and drainage with plastic or lumen-apposing metal stents. For solid components or insufficient drainage, a transgastric endoscopic necrosectomy is recommended. The treatment of severe AP requires an interdisciplinary management in specialized centers and regular re-evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy.
conclusionInterventional endoscopy has become established as the standard for treatment of severe AP.
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.