ArticleClinical endoscopy2024
Synergistic effect of independent risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction model for the occurrence of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography based on multidimensional indicators.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Related Factors of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in Cholangiocarcinoma Patients: A Retrospective Study in Northeast Thailand.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after Billroth II anastomosis: a comparison of gastroscope and duodenoscope.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Optimal timing for discontinuation of ERCP in cases of difficult selective biliary cannulation.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThis study aimed to examine the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP).
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study included 1,273 patients with native papillae who underwent ERCP for bile duct stones in Japan. Independent PEP risk factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. Significant risk factors for PEP in the multivariate analysis were included in the final analysis to examine the synergistic effect of independent risk factors for PEP.
resultsPEP occurred in 45 of 1,273 patients (3.5%). Three factors including difficult cannulation ≥10 minutes, pancreatic injection, and normal serum bilirubin level were included in the final analysis. The incidences of PEP in patients with zero, one, two, and three factors were 0.5% (2/388), 1.9% (9/465), 6.0% (17/285), and 12.6% (17/135), respectively. With increasing risk factors for PEP, the incidence of PEP significantly increased (1 factor vs. 2 factors, p=0.006; 2 factors vs. 3 factors, p=0.033).
conclusionsAs the number of risk factors for PEP increases, the risk of PEP may not be additive; however, it may multiply. Thus, aggressive prophylaxis for PEP is strongly recommended in patients with multiple risk factors.
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.