ArticleBMC gastroenterology2023
Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography outcomes between cap-fitted forward and side viewing endoscopes in patients with Billroth II anastomosis.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere have been no previous studies that directly compared outcomes between cap-fitted forward-viewing and side viewing endoscopes (SE). This study aimed to compare the technical success rate and occurrence of adverse events between the side viewing and cap-fitted forward-viewing endoscope (CE) groups among patients with Billroth II anatomy who underwent ERCP.
methodsThe medical records of patients with a previous history of subtotal gastrectomy using Billroth II reconstruction who underwent ERCP at Yeungnam University Hospital between January 2004 and December 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into CE and SE group. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to minimize selection bias.
resultsPropensity score matching resulted in 55 matched pairs for further analysis. Patients' characteristics were comparable in the matched cohorts. Final success rate of selective bile duct cannulation was not significantly different between the SE and CE groups (98.2% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.308). The complete CBD stone removal rate in CBD stone and successful biliary drainage rate in malignant biliary obstruction were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of total ERCP-related adverse events was higher in the CE group than in the SE group, but the difference was not statistically significant (10.9% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.507). Among adverse events, the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis showed higher tendency in the CE group than in the SE group (10.9% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.297).
conclusionIn conclusion, CE seems to be equally effective as SE for ERCP in patients with Billroth II anatomy. However, attention should be paid to development of post ERCP complications, especially pancreatitis, when performed by CE.
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.