ArticleDEN open2024
Factors predicting technical failure of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis.
Article in DEN open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technical Evolution, Clinical Application, and Outcomes of Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage in Acute Cholecystitis: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evolution of gallbladder drainage: a comprehensive review from percutaneous to endoscopic ultrasound-guided approaches.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients: A comprehensive review article.DEN open · 2026Review
- Article
- Timing and other factors influencing shortterm outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis: a retrospective study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Ultraslim catheter-type peroral cholangioscope-assisted endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis.Endoscopy · 2024Article
- Benefits of endoscopic gallbladder stenting following percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is a highly technical procedure, but few studies have evaluated factors that predict its technical success. Therefore, in this study, we sought to identify predictors of technically successful ETGBD. Methods: One hundred and eighty-two patients who underwent ETGBD for acute cholecystitis at our hospital were retrospectively investigated. Factors associated with technical failure were identified by focusing on clinical characteristics, anatomical features (direction of the cystic duct branch and course of the cystic duct), and procedural factors (cystic duct and gallbladder with or without contrast and cystic duct injury). Results: The technical success rate was 84.6% (154/182) and the clinical success rate was 96.1% (148/154). The adverse event rate was 11.0% (20/182; cystic duct injury in 13 patients, pancreatitis in six, and liver abscess in one. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified the right cranial direction and spiral-type course of the cystic duct to be significant anatomical features and cystic duct injury to be a significant procedural feature contributing to the technical failure of ETGBD. Conclusions: ETGBD is a highly practical procedure for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, difficulty is encountered in some cases because of anatomical and procedural factors. Our results suggest that ETGBD may be difficult and thus should not be performed in cases with the right cranial direction or spiral-type course of the cystic duct or those with cystic duct injury.
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.