Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41732329›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2026

EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage-technical tips and outcomes: narrative review.

Yasunobu Yamashita, Masayuki Kitano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yasunobu YamashitaSecond Department of Internal Medicine, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama City, Wakayama 641-0012, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6725-5708
Masayuki KitanoSecond Department of Internal Medicine, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama City, Wakayama, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6885-9223

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is becoming an alternative treatment in patients with difficult retrograde access to the pancreatic duct due to difficulty in cannulation or surgically altered anatomy. This is narrative review for technical tips and outcomes for EUS-PDD. EUS-PDD is performed via one of two approaches: EUS-guided rendezvous and EUS-guided transmural drainage and involves the insertion of plastic or metal stents. While the use of plastic has been extensively described, fully covered self-expandable metal stents were reported in only six studies, and with a small number of patients. A meta-analysis including 27 trials and 902 patients reported technical success, clinical success, and adverse event (AE) rates of 89%, 88%, and 17%, respectively. The most common AE for post-EUS-PDD was acute pancreatitis, which occurred at a rate of 3%. The cumulative rates of bleeding, perforation, pancreatic leak, and infection were 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1%, respectively. The re-intervention rate due to stent dislocation, occlusion, or other reasons was 19%. In cases of surgically altered anatomy, the EUS-guided approach is significantly superior to the enteroscopy-guided approach with regard to pancreatic duct opacification (87% vs 30%;

Indexed as

EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainageEUS-guided rendezvous drainageEUS-guided transmural drainageinterventional EUS

Identifiers

PMID41732329
PMCPMC12924917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.