Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38594433›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2024

Transpancreatic Sphincterotomy After Double Guidewire Technique Was Noninferior to Primary Transpancreatic Sphincterotomy in Difficult Biliary Cannulation.

Shaofei Wang, Bingqing Bai, Sisi Liu, Yuanyuan Fang, Chenyu Zhang, Xinwen Chen, Qiming Huang, Jiren Wang, Jianglong Hong, Yang Li and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Current Gallstone Treatment Methods, State of the Art.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaofei Wang *Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Bingqing Bai *Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Sisi Liu *Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Yuanyuan FangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Chenyu ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Xinwen ChenDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Qiming HuangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Jiren WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Jianglong HongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Yang LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Zhangwei XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Xiaochang LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Junjun BaoDepartment of Endoscopy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.
Qiao MeiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0635-6564
Rutao HongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Jixi Road 218, Hefei, 230022, China. hongrt0982@sina.com.
Anhui Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen unintentional pancreatic duct access occurs during difficult biliary cannulation, the double guidewire (DGW) or transpancreatic sphincterotomy (TPS) may be utilized. DGW can be easily switched to TPS due to the existing guidewire in the pancreatic duct. However, the efficacy of TPS after DGW, named sequential DGW-TPS technique, versus primary TPS has not been assessed.

aimsOur aim was to compare the benefits and adverse events of sequential DGW-TPS technique and primary TPS.

methodsWe performed a comparative retrospective cohort study that enrolled a total of 117 patients with native papillae. The patients were divided into one of 2 groups according to the primary bile duct access technique (sequential DGW-TPS or primary TPS), both with pancreatic stenting.

resultsBetween November 2017 and May 2023, a total of 84 patients were grouped into sequential DGW-TPS and 33 into primary TPS. The overall post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) rate was 4.3% in the entire cohort, with no statistical differences were observed between the groups in terms of PEP rates (P = 0.927), PEP severity (P = 1.000), first biliary cannulation success (P = 0.621), overall cannulation success (P = 1.000), hyperamylasemia incidence (P = 0.241), elevated amylase levels (P = 0.881), and postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.185). Furthermore, these results remained consistent in multivariable regression analysis.

conclusionsThe sequential DGW-TPS technique showed a comparable safety and biliary cannulation success rate to primary TPS in difficult biliary cannulation. Given the potential long-term complications associated with TPS, DGW should be first if inadvertent pancreatic access occurs, with TPS serving as second only if DGW fails.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradePancreatic DuctsPancreatitisSphincterotomy, EndoscopicAdultAgedCatheterizationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment OutcomeAdverse effectsCatheterizationCholangiopancreatographyEndoscopicEndoscopic RretrogradeHumansRetrospective StudiesSphincterotomy

Identifiers

PMID38594433
OpenAlexW4394622563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.