ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2022
Second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after failure of initial biliary cannulation: A single institution retrospective experience.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Enlarged fistulotomy of the papilla as access to the biliary tract during ERCP.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: Prevention, Diagnosis and Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- Fully covered self-expandable metal stent for intraprocedural or late-diagnosed Type-II endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related perforations.BMC gastroenterology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not always successful when difficult biliary cannulation occurs. A second ERCP seems to be a worthwhile option following initial failure cannulation; however, relevant data are limited. Thus, the aim of the present study was to determine the outcomes of repeating ERCP in patients in whom the first biliary cannulation with or without precut sphincterotomy failed. It retrospectively analyzed 4,136 patients who underwent an initial biliary access between June 2016 and September 2020. Data from our databases were analyzed. Efficacy was based on the cannulation rate of the second ERCP and safety was assessed in terms of adverse events. Of 94 patients, 56 (59.6%) underwent a second ERCP and the success rate in biliary cannulation was 83.9% (47 of 56). The median operative time in the second ERCP was shorter than that in the initial procedure (47 vs. 65 min, P<0.001). A total of 5 patients (8.9%) suffered from mild ERCP-associated complications following the second ERCP. Compared with patients that did not undergo a second ERCP, patients that underwent a second ERCP had a lower 30-day mortality rate (13.2 vs. 1.8%, P=0.038). In addition, by univariate and multivariate analysis, it was observed that normal preoperative serum bilirubin levels and an interval time of <3 days were correlated with the cannulation failure of a second ERCP (OR=9.211, P=0.019, OR=6.765, P=0.041, respectively). A second ERCP following failure of an initial biliary cannulation appears to be safe and effective. For most clinically stable patients with an unsuccessful initial ERCP, a second ERCP after 2-4 days may be an optimal strategy. Preoperative normal serum bilirubin levels may be a risk factor that can be used for predicting cannulation failure of a second ERCP procedure.
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.