ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Clinical analysis of 45 cases of perforation were identified during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedure.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case Report: Gallbladder perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-a rare complication.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Management of Stapfer Type II Perforations After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Duodenal Stenting for Iatrogenic Stapfer Type I Duodenal Perforation: An Alternative to Surgical Repair.Cureus · 2025Article
- Treatments for different types of ERCP-related Stapfer IV injury: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- A Tale of 2 Tics: Endoscopic Treatment of Perforated Periampullary Diverticulum Within a Giant Duodenal Diverticulum.ACG case reports journal · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become an important method to diagnose and treat biliary-pancreatic diseases. Perforations are infrequent but serious complications can occur during ERCPs. However, it is unclear which patients are suitable for surgery and when these patients should receive surgery. Aim: To analyze the outcome of 45 patients with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) related perforation. Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed all 45 patients with ERCP-related perforation between January 2003 and December 2017, and observed the location and causes of perforation, treatment strategies, and mortality. Results: Twenty thousand four hundred and seventy-nine patients received ERCP procedures from January 2003 to December 2017 in our digestive endoscopy center. Forty-five patients suffered from ERCP-related perforations. The incidence rate of ERCP-related perforations was 0.22%. Twenty-six patients suffered from periampullary perforations, 15 patients suffered from duodenal wall perforations, 1 patient suffered from a fundus perforation, 1 patient suffered from a residual gallbladder duct perforation, 1 patient suffered from a papillary diverticulum perforation, and 1 patient suffered from an intrahepatic bile duct perforation. Six patients with duodenal perforations underwent surgery, and the other patients received conservative treatment. One patient with a duodenal perforation and ERCP-related pancreatitis died of heart failure, and all the other patients recovered. The mortality rate was 2.2%. Conclusion: Endoscopic closure is seen as the first method for treating Stapfer type I perforations in the early phase, and surgery is seen as a remedial method when local treatment was failed. The Stapfer type II to type IV perforations can recover by conservative treatment.
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.