ArticleCureus2026
Timing of Biliary Drainage and Clinical Outcomes in Acute Cholangitis: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsAlthough guidelines recommend early biliary drainage for acute cholangitis, evidence for optimal timing across severity grades remains limited. We examined associations between drainage timing and both functional and survival outcomes stratified by disease severity using the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 criteria.
methodsThis retrospective observational cohort study included 214 consecutive patients with acute cholangitis who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography between April 2022 and March 2024 at a tertiary center in Okinawa, Japan. Patients were classified according to the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines severity criteria. The primary outcome was discharge disposition (favorable: discharge to pre-admission residence; unfavorable: alternative facility or death). Time from presentation to drainage was analyzed at 12-, 24-, 36-, and 48-hour cutoffs using Fisher's exact test. Results: The cohort comprised 92 Grade I (43%), 83 Grade II (39%), and 39 Grade III (18%) patients. Discharge-to-pre-admission-residence rates were 95% (87/92), 80% (66/83), and 69% (27/39), respectively. For Grade I, drainage within 24 hours was associated with 100% (59/59) discharge to pre-admission residence versus 88% (28/32) beyond 24 hours (P = 0.013). Grade II showed no functional benefit but was associated with improved survival when drainage occurred within 48 hours (99% vs 82%, P = 0.045). Grade III survivors showed better functional recovery with drainage within 24 hours (92% vs 50%, P = 0.014), though this comparison included only 10 patients in the delayed group and should be interpreted with considerable caution.
conclusionsAssociations between drainage timing and outcomes varied by severity grade and outcome type. Given the observational design and limited adjustment for confounders, these findings suggest severity-stratified drainage protocols may be beneficial but require validation through prospective studies with multivariable adjustment to establish causality.
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.