Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38716417›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024

Comparison between different advanced cannulation techniques for difficult biliary cannulation: a systematic review with a meta-analysis.

Liangjing Wang, Limin Wang, Nan Huang, Tian Li, Xiaohua Shi, Qilin Zhu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Liangjing Wang *Department of Gastroenterology, Suzhou Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Suzhou, China.
Limin Wang *Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao University of Internal Medicine, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Nan HuangDepartment of Nursing, HZ Domestic Professional College, Heze, China.
Tian LiSchool of Basic Medicine, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xiaohua ShiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Suzhou Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Suzhou, China.
Qilin ZhuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Suzhou Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Suzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the double-guidewire technique along with other methods (persistent standard cannulation techniques, transpancreatic sphincterotomy, and pancreatic stent-assisted technique) for difficult biliary cannulation. Methods: Two researchers searched for literature on the efficacy and safety of the double-guidewire technique and other techniques in difficult biliary cannulation in databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The success rate of cannulation, duration of cannulation, post-ERCP pancreatitis, and overall postoperative complications were also analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: In total, 20 randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies involving 2008 participants were identified. The success rate of cannulation in the double-guidewire technique was much higher than that in persistent standard cannulation techniques [RR = 1.37, 95%CI (1.05, 1.79), Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the success rate of cannulation ranged from transpancreatic sphincterotomy to the double-guidewire technique and then to persistent standard cannulation techniques.

Indexed as

double guide wire techniqueendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographymeta-analysisSuccess ratetranspancreatic sphincterotomy

Identifiers

PMID38716417
PMCPMC11074372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.