ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Risks and use of ERCP during the diagnostic workup in a national cohort of biliary cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prediction model for the occurrence of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography based on multidimensional indicators.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn biliary cancer, the indication of endoscopic intervention might be diagnostic as well as therapeutic, in the latter situation with the aim to relieve biliary obstruction e.g. by stenting. Our aim was to investigate the use of endoscopic biliary interventions during the diagnostic workup of biliary cancers in a national cohort, and to evaluate their complications, especially cholangitis and pancreatitis.
methodsThis is a registry-based study of national cohort of patients with biliary cancers in Sweden 2010-2020. The use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during the diagnostic work up period before treatment onset, and risk of complications were evaluated in patients with gallbladder cancer, intrahepatic-, perihilar- and distal cholangiocarcinoma. The risk of complications was compared depending on age, sex, comorbidity, in relation to stage and curative intent, endoscopy unit size, and with relation to survival.
resultsForty percent of the patients with biliary cancer underwent ERCP during the diagnostic workup, with variations depending on diagnosis. There was a 20% overall risk of periprocedural complications, a 9% risk of post-ERCP-pancreatitis (PEP), and a 6% risk of cholangitis. Increasing tumor stage did not increase risk, nor did comorbidity. The complication rates were slightly higher for younger patients and those undergoing curative treatment. For perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) treated with curative intention, the risk of periprocedural complications was as high as 30.7%. No association between post-ERCP complications and survival was found.
conclusionIrrespective of type of biliary cancer, ERCP is frequently used during diagnostic workup. The complication risk indicates that primary biliary cancers are complication prone, regardless of stage. Notably the risk of complications was the highest for younger patients with low comorbidity scores, as well as for patients undergoing curatively aiming treatment.
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.