ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2025
Diagnostic Yield of a Novel 11-Fr Digital Cholangioscope for Indeterminate Biliary Disease Using Macroscopic-On-Site Evaluation: Prospective Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- New Horizons in Cholangiopancreatoscopy: Where Are We Heading in 2026?Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Article
- Feasibility of Novel Slim Peroral Cholangiopancreatoscopy for the Diagnosis of Pancreatobiliary Disease.DEN open · 2026Article
- Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment With Cholangiopancreatoscopy.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Review
- Evolving techniques to optimize ERCP-based sampling and evaluation of malignant biliary strictures.Gastroenterology report · 2026Review
- Initial Results from a Novel Video Cholangiopancreatoscope: An International Multicenter Study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Yield of a Novel 11-Fr Digital Cholangioscope for Indeterminate Biliary Disease Using Macroscopic-On-Site Evaluation: Prospective Comparative Study.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimA novel 11-Fr digital cholangioscope (eyeMAX) has recently become available. However, a prospective comparative study of the diagnostic yield of the eyeMAX and of a conventional cholangioscope (SpyGlass DS II) has not been reported. Therefore, the aim of this study was to prospectively compare the diagnostic yield of the eyeMAX and of the SpyGlass DS II for indeterminate biliary disease. PATIENTS AND
methodForceps biopsy was repeated until visible core tissue was obtained. The primary outcome of this study was the diagnostic accuracy of the biopsy specimens obtained by the eyeMAX. The secondary outcomes were comparisons of the diagnostic yield of visual findings, tissue size, number of forceps biopsies until MOSE positivity, and adverse events.
resultsFifty patients were prospectively enrolled in the eyeMAX group. And 47 patients in the SpyGlass DS II group were enrolled as a historical control. The number of biopsies was significantly fewer in the eyeMAX group than in the SpyGlass DS II group (p = 0.001). Tissue size was larger in the eyeMAX group (2.96 ± 0.69 mm
conclusionsThe eyeMAX has a favorable diagnostic yield in terms of visual findings and the forceps biopsy specimen.
trial registration000049465.
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.