ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy
Primary endoscopic bile duct stone removal for severe acute cholangitis: a retrospective study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and efficacy of single-stage endoscopic stone removal and the timing of ERCP for acute cholangitis: a multicenter study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 suggest primary stone removal for mild to moderate cholangitis, a guideline for severe acute cholangitis is not mentioned. We, therefore, investigated the clinical outcomes of patients with severe acute cholangitis to confirm the usefulness and safety of primary stone removal.
methodThis study included 104 severe acute cholangitis patients without gallstone pancreatitis diagnosed at our institution between January 2014 and December 2020. Patients with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage as the primary drainage, bile duct stenosis, and endoscopically unidentified bile duct stones were excluded from this study. The clinical results of 14 patients with primary stone removal (primary group) and 23 patients with elective stone removal (elective group) were then retrospectively examined (excluding abnormal values due to underlying diseases).
resultsUpon comparing the patient characteristics between groups, the elective group had significantly higher cardiovascular dysfunction (57% vs 7%; DISCUSSION: There were no significant differences in adverse events or complete stone removal rates between the two groups. In the primary group, the period from the first endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography to stone removal (0 days vs 12 days;
conclusionIf patients are appropriately selected, bile duct stones may be safely removed for the treatment of severe acute cholangitis.
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.