ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Predictors of Treatment Outcomes and Limitations of Peroral Pancreatoscopy-Guided Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy for Pancreatic Duct Stones.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe optimal endoscopic approach for pancreatic duct stones in chronic pancreatitis remains unclear, particularly regarding the selection between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and peroral pancreatoscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (POPS-EHL). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and limitations of POPS-EHL and to identify pre-procedural predictors of incomplete fragmentation.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent POPS-assisted treatment for pancreatic duct stones at a tertiary center between 2017 and 2025. Clinical outcomes, adverse events, and factors associated with incomplete EHL were assessed, and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of EHL failure.
resultsPOPS insertion was feasible in 47 of 52 patients (90.4%), and 34 proceeded to POPS-EHL. Complete fragmentation without the need for ESWL was achieved in 67.6% (23/34), whereas 32.4% (11/34) required ESWL because of incomplete fragmentation. Stones requiring ESWL had significantly higher CT attenuation and larger size than those successfully fragmented. Multivariate analysis identified CT attenuation > 2,050 HU (OR 8.92; 95% CI 1.78-44.6; p = 0.007) and diameter > 12.8 mm (OR 6.45; 95% CI 1.41-29.6; p = 0.016) as independent predictors of incomplete EHL. Adverse events were limited to mild or moderate pancreatitis.
conclusionPOPS-EHL is an effective option for selected patients with chronic pancreatitis. However, stones with CT attenuation exceeding 2,050 HU or a diameter greater than 12.8 mm carry a markedly higher risk of incomplete fragmentation. Incorporating these CT-based thresholds into pre-procedural planning may help guide the choice between POPS-EHL and ESWL and ultimately improve procedural efficiency and clinical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41609910What 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.