ArticleEndoscopy2025
Biliary drainage prior to pancreatoduodenectomy with endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy versus conventional ERCP: propensity score-matched study and surgeon survey.
Article in Endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of preoperative internal versus external biliary drainage on surgical and oncological outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Changing the Flow: How EUS-Guided Drainage is Reshaping the Management of Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative endoscopic biliary drainage may lead to complications (16 %-24 %), potentially hampering surgical exploration. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) may reduce drainage-related complications; however, in the absence of surgeon-reported outcomes, it is unknown whether EUS-CDS may hamper surgical exploration. This study assessed the impact of preoperative EUS-CDS on pancreatoduodenectomy.
methodConsecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy after preoperative biliary drainage were included in all eight centers performing EUS-CDS in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (Jan 2020-Dec 2022). The primary outcome was major postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included bile leak grade B/C, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C, and overall postoperative complications. A propensity score-matching (1:3) analysis was performed. Surgeons performing pancreatoduodenectomy after EUS-CDS completed a survey on surgical difficulty.
results937 patients with pancreatoduodenectomy after preoperative biliary drainage were included (42 EUS-CDS, 895 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]). Major postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (19.0 %) in the EUS-CDS group and 292 (32.6 %) in the ERCP group (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95 %CI 0.23-1.07). No significant differences were observed in overall complications (RR 0.95; 95 %CI 0.51-1.76), bile leak (RR 1.25; 95 %CI 0.31-4.98), or POPF (RR 0.62; 95 %CI 0.25-1.56). Results were similar after matching. The survey was completed for 29 pancreatoduodenectomies; surgery was not (13, 45 %), "slightly" (9, 31 %), "clearly" (5,17 %), and "severely" (2, 7 %) more complex because of EUS-CDS.
conclusionThis early experience suggests that preoperative biliary drainage with EUS-CDS does not increase the rate of complications after pancreatoduodenectomy and only infrequently hampers surgical exploration.
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.