ArticleJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology2024
Indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and development of hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hemorrhage is a common complication associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), usually following sphincterotomy. Studies investigating risk factors for hemorrhage including ERCP indication have been conflicting. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to characterize the association between the ERCP indication and hemorrhage. Methods: Database searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were conducted to identify articles up to December 12, 2022. Randomized trials or observational studies of adult patients undergoing ERCP were included. Quality assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scales for randomized trials and observational studies respectively was conducted. A random effects meta-analysis generating pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals was conducted. Results: A total of 1323 articles were identified of which 26 were included with up to 25 121 subjects in each meta-analysis. Rates of sphincterotomy (median 96.1%; IQR 60.5-100), biliary stent placement (median 17.2%; IQR 10.6-34.4), antiplatelet use (median 6.0%; IQR 0-10.1), and anticoagulant use (median 1.9%; IQR 0%-3.2%) varied among included studies. No specific indication was associated with hemorrhage in the meta-analyses including cholangitis (OR 1.50; 95% CI 0.97-2.32), choledocholithiasis/biliary stone (OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.95-1.73), malignancy (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.66-1.42), sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.72-2.40), and acute pancreatitis (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.44-1.49). Conclusions: Overall, no indication was significantly associated with increased hemorrhage following ERCP. However, given limitations in the included studies (ie, significant heterogeneity between studies), additional research to better characterize these associations is needed. Protocol Registration Number: PROSPERO (CRD42021283978).
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.