ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Impact of Patient Positioning and Endotracheal Intubation During ERCP: Insights from a Large Database.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is conventionally performed in the prone position after intubating the airway. However, ERCP can also be performed in the left lateral and supine positions without endotracheal intubation. We compared procedural metrics and outcomes in patients placed prone, supine, and left lateral during ERCP.
methodsIn this retrospective multi-center analysis using a large, organization-wide database, patients were categorized as prone, supine, and left lateral based on the positioning for ERCP. Procedural metrics were calculated using contemporaneous electronic health records. All-cause readmission within 7 and 30 days of ERCP was analyzed.
resultsThe 6510 patients who met selection criteria were categorized as follows: Supine: 3362; left lateral: 2149; and prone: 999. Endotracheal intubation was performed more frequently in supine (90%) and prone (95%) positions than left lateral position (27%; p < 0.01). The time intervals (minutes) for left lateral, prone, and supine positions were: induction time 7.54 ± 4.95, 9.3 ± 6.22, 6.77 ± 3.67; anesthesia ready time 8.98 ± 5.15, 14.13 ± 7.41, 9.41 ± 3.96; ERCP duration 31.71 ± 25.77, 40.99 ± 28.6, 36.49 ± 29.03 and total time in room 54.95 ± 30.26, 72.61 ± 32.76, 62.44 ± 33.06 (p < 0.001 for each measure between three groups) respectively. Regression and variable impact analysis demonstrated that endotracheal intubation was the most significant factor for increased induction time (100%), anesthesia ready time (97%), and duration of ERCP (55%). Adjusted odds of readmission at 7 days were lower in supine patients compared to prone (0.63; 95% CI 0.44, 0.91; p = 0.01).
conclusionSupine and left lateral positions improve procedural efficiency primarily due to reduced endotracheal intubation rates, without increasing readmission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41291349What 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.