ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2025
European Consensus Recommendations for Direct Cholangioscopy and Pancreatoscopy Using a Modified Delphi Process.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- UEG Journal-In Times of Turmoil, Science Matters.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
- Mapping malignancy: Multicenter study addressing topographic challenges in biliary stricture artificial intelligence analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Recommendations for Digital Single-Operator Cholangiopancreatoscopy: Turning Vision Into Practice!United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- European Consensus Recommendations for Direct Cholangioscopy and Pancreatoscopy Using a Modified Delphi Process.United European gastroenterology journal · 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
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimDirect cholangioscopy and pancreatoscopy have become widely implemented techniques in the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms of several pancreaticobiliary disorders. This study aimed to generate general and indication-specific European consensus recommendations on cholangioscopy and pancreatoscopy.
methodsSupported by the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: (1) pre-procedural considerations, (2) general technical aspects, (3) biliopancreatic stones, (4) biliary strictures, and (5) other indications. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the GRADE methodology. Cholangioscopy experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When 80% consensus was not reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback and subjected to an additional Delphi round. Statements were rejected if they failed to reach consensus after three Delphi rounds.
resultsThirty cholangioscopy experts completed the Delphi process. Forty-two (97.6%) generated statements were accepted, of which 39 (92.9%) in the first Delphi round. 12 statements on preprocedural and periprocedural settings, 8 statements on biliopancreatic stones, 13 statements on biliary strictures, and 9 statements on other indications were accepted.
conclusionUsing a modified Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific consensus recommendations for cholangioscopy to guide clinical practice.
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.