ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Endoscopic management of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single center retrospective analysis.
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 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.
- Jejunal Loop-Preserving and Mesentery-Sparing Reconstruction after Pancreaticoduodenectomy in a Patient with Prior Total Gastrectomy.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Successful pancreatic duct cannulation using a novel rotatable dual-action sphincterotome at the pancreaticojejunostomy site.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Role of the EUS in the Treatment of Biliopancreatic Disease in Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndications and outcomes of endoscopic approaches in treating postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) are underinvestigated. The present study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic treatment for POPF following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).
methodsData of consecutive patients undergoing PD between 2014 and 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with POPF treated by an endoscopic approach were selected. The primary endpoint was clinical efficacy of the endoscopic approach. Secondary endpoints were variables associated with clinical efficacy of endoscopic treatment.
resultsDuring the study period, a total of 436 patients underwent PD. Overall POPF rate was 18.4%. Twenty-one patients with POPF underwent endoscopic treatment and composed the study cohort. The median timing for endoscopic treatment was 20 postoperative days (POD). The types of endoscopic treatments performed included: trans-anastomotic intraductal pancreatic stent (23.8%); lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) through the pancreatico-jejunal (PJ) anastomotic dehiscence (23.8%); large caliber aspirating nose-to-retroperitoneum tube through the PJ anastomosis leak (9.5%); triple metal stenting (enteral + biliary + pancreatic) (9.5%); transgastric LAMS close to pancreatic stump (14.3%); nose-to-retroperitoneum tube into a LAMS placed through PJ dehiscence (9.5%); transgastric LAMS near the pancreatic stump associated with an intraductal pancreatic trans-anastomotic stent (9.5%). Technical and clinical success rate were 100% and 71.4%, respectively. After endoscopic treatment, 19% of patients underwent surgical reoperation and 9.5% died. Timing of endoscopic treatment was the only factor associated with clinical success (POD 20 vs POD 13.5; p = 0.039).
conclusionEndoscopy can be an effective option for managing POPF after PD with a clinical success rate of 71.4%. Proper patient selection and the timing of intervention are key to achieving good clinical outcomes. Higher success rate was seen for endoscopic treatment performed after the 20th POD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40372448What 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.