Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40258999›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A network meta-analysis of optimal strategies for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.

Erfan Arabpour, Alireza Azarboo, Amirreza Pouladi, Parya Mozafari Komesh-Tape, Fatemeh Mousavi Eshlaghi, Hadi Golmoradi, Amirhossein Ghaseminejad-Raeini, Amir Sadeghi, Mohammad Reza Zali

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

9 authors.

Erfan ArabpourGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran. erfanarabpour1999@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0557-1278
Alireza AzarbooSchool of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amirreza PouladiGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.
Parya Mozafari Komesh-TapeGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.
Fatemeh Mousavi EshlaghiSchool of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hadi GolmoradiGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.
Amirhossein Ghaseminejad-RaeiniSchool of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amir SadeghiGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Reza ZaliGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, RIGLD, Arabi Ave, Daneshjoo Blvd, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous interventions have been proposed to reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), but it remains uncertain which approach is the most effective. The objective of this network meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare different preventive strategies for overall, mild, and moderate-to-severe PEP in both average- and high-risk patients. A systematic search was conducted for randomized controlled trials across the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies that featured at least two of the following interventions: pre-procedural administration of 100 mg of rectal diclofenac (D) or indomethacin (I), aggressive hydration utilizing normal saline (NS) or lactated Ringer's solution (LR), 5-french pancreatic duct stent (S), and either a placebo or an active control (C). The interventions were ranked according to their surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) values. The study protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024538533). Of the total 42 (n = 11,493) identified studies, 23 studies (n = 5,410) were categorized into the average-risk group and 19 studies (n = 6,083) were categorized into high-risk group. Based on SUCRA, I + NS was ranked as the best preventive method for overall and mild PEP in average-risk group. However, I + LR was the most effective method of prevention of moderate-to-severe PEP in this group. In high-risk group, I + S was the best preventive method of overall and mild PEP. However, D was the most effective method of prevention of moderate-to-severe PEP in this group. The findings of this network meta-analysis indicate that endoscopists should consider all available prophylactic options when performing ERCP, rather than favoring one over the others.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradePancreatitisDiclofenacHumansIndomethacinRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStentsDiclofenacIndomethacinCholangiopancreatographyERCPPancreatitisPreventionProphylaxis

Identifiers

PMID40258999
PMCPMC12012026

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.