Trial reportDigestive diseases and sciences2023
A Risk Prediction Model for Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis After Stent Insertion for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Development and Validation.
Trial report in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk prediction model for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Prediction model for the occurrence of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography based on multidimensional indicators.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictive models for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Risk factors of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with biliary tract diseases.BMC surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPancreatitis is the most common complication of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). There are currently no prediction models, particularly for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) after biliary stent placement due to malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). To that end, we aim to develop and validate a predictive model for PEP.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent ERCP for biliary stent placement due to MBO at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University from January 1, 2014 to August 31, 2021. The eligible patients were randomly allocated to the development and validation cohorts. A prediction model was built using the development cohort, and the model's effect was validated using a validation cohort.
resultsA total of 1524 patients were enrolled, including 1016 in the development cohort and 508 in the validation cohort, with an overall PEP rate of 7.1%. The model's predictors included acute pancreatitis history, the absence of pancreatic duct dilation, nonpancreatic cancer, difficult cannulation, and pancreatic injection. The area under the curve (AUC) in the development cohort was 0.810, and the incidence of PEP in the low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups was 1.53%, 9.12%, and 36.36%, respectively. Meanwhile, the AUC of the validation cohort was 0.781, and the incidence of PEP in the low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups was 4.17%, 8.75%, and 41.67%, respectively.
conclusionsThis study was the first to build and validate a risk prediction model, especially for PEP after biliary stent placement due to MBO. Moreover, this model might assist clinicians in identifying high-risk patients and help implement preventive measures in a more timely manner.
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.