ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Clinical outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after Billroth II anastomosis: a comparison of gastroscope and duodenoscope.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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.
- Article
- Analysis of quality of life and reflux oesophagitis following Billroth II and Roux-en-Y gastrointestinal reconstruction for gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Article
- Effects of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis on postoperative gastrointestinal symptom recovery and bile reflux incidence in patients with gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with Billroth II anastomosis is challenging due to post-surgical anatomical alterations. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of using a duodenoscope and a cap-assisted gastroscope in these patients.
methodsSeventy-nine patients with Billroth II anastomosis and a naïve papilla were included in the study. ERCP was performed using either a cap-assisted gastroscope (n = 45) or a duodenoscope (n = 34). The primary outcome was the cannulation success rates, while secondary outcomes included clinical success rates, cannulation time, procedure duration, and complications.
resultsAfferent limb intubation was successful in 67.1% of patients. Among these, selective biliary cannulation (SBC) was achieved in 73.6%, with no significant difference between the two groups. However, cannulation time was significantly longer in the cap-assisted gastroscope group (7.6 min vs. 5.8 min, p = 0.011). Complications occurred only in the cap-assisted gastroscope group, including one perforation (2.2%) and two cases of pancreatitis (4.4%), though the overall complication rate was not significantly different. Among the 40 patients (50.7%) who failed ERCP, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) was the most common rescue intervention (55%), followed by other procedures, including percutaneous gallbladder drainage, repeated ERCP, surgery, and conservative treatment.
conclusionsBoth cap-assisted gastroscopes and duodenoscopes are viable options for ERCP in patients with Billroth II anastomosis. However, cannulation time was significantly shorter in the duodenoscope group.
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.