SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Outcomes of Repeat Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Following Initial Unsuccessful Cannulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Repeat ERCP in the Era of Interventional EUS: Toward an Individualized Rescue Strategy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is commonly used to treat pancreaticobiliary diseases, but can be technically challenging, leading to occasional unsuccessful attempts. While repeat ERCP is one option in these cases, data on the effectiveness and safety of this practice remain limited. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess outcomes of repeat ERCP after initial unsuccessful attempt.
methodsMEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched on February 28, 2025. We included randomized trials and observational studies reporting on outcomes of repeat ERCP following an initial unsuccessful attempt, with the primary outcome being technical success of cannulation, and secondary outcomes including adverse events (AEs). Random-effects models were used to pool data, and heterogeneity was assessed through the I
resultsA total of 22 studies involving 1514 patients with a median age of 62 years were included. The majority of studies were conducted at a single center (86.4%), where the most common indication for repeat ERCP was choledocholithiasis (41.2%), followed by malignant biliary obstruction (29.0%). The pooled technical success rate of repeat ERCP was 83.6% (95% CI 78.6-88.1%, I
conclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrated encouraging success rates with repeat ERCP after initial failure, with acceptably low AE rates, highlighting its role as a primary option in cases of initial unsuccessful ERCP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41706406What 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.