Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39664078›Full record

ReviewMedical review (2021)2024

Pancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a key technology truly improves treatment model for pancreatic stones.

Jinhui Yi, Jinjie Xu, Lianghao Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical review (2021), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
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

3 authors.

Jinhui YiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital , Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jinjie XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital , Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Lianghao HuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital , Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7535-7475

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is characterized by irreversible destruction of pancreatic parenchyma, inflammatory cell infiltration and progressive fibrosis of pancreatic tissue. Obstruction of pancreatic duct by pancreatic stone is the common pathological change in the course of CP with the incidence of over 50 % at the diagnosis of CP. These ductal stones would cause pancreatic parenchymal hypertension and local ischemia, which was eventually followed by recurrent episodes of painful pancreatitis or other manifestations of pancreatic exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. Removing pancreatic stones has been confirmed as the core to reduce pressure, improve drainage and lessen pain. Surgical therapy achieves satisfying pain relief with more complications, higher cost and less repeatability compared with endoscopic therapy. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, which used to be the standard endoscopic therapy for pancreatic stones, would fail if these stones are large or complex, while pancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (P-ESWL), which has been applied since 1987, could overcome this problem. Up to now, a large number of guidelines have recommended the P-ESWL as the first-line treatment strategy for radiopaque obstructive main pancreatic duct stones larger than 5 mm located in the head/body of the pancreas, and P-ESWL had completely changed the traditional treatment model for CP patients with pancreatic stones. In this article, we will focus on the technical progress, efficacy, safety and potential research areas of P-ESWL, we also give us suggestions for lithotripters improvement.

Indexed as

chronic pancreatitispancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsypancreatic stonestreatment model

Identifiers

PMID39664078
PMCPMC11629309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.