Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42056927›Full record

SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2026

Systematic review and network meta-analysis: comparison of different techniques for difficult biliary cannulation.

Yen-Ying Wu, Sz-Iuan Shiu, Chun-Fang Tung, Hsu-En Cheng, Chung-Wang Ko

Abstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

5 authors.

Yen-Ying WuDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No. 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sect. 4, Taichung, 40705, Taiwan.
Sz-Iuan ShiuDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No. 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sect. 4, Taichung, 40705, Taiwan. b9002007@hotmail.com.
Chun-Fang TungDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No. 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sect. 4, Taichung, 40705, Taiwan.
Hsu-En ChengDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No. 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sect. 4, Taichung, 40705, Taiwan.
Chung-Wang KoDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, No. 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sect. 4, Taichung, 40705, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimDifficult biliary cannulation (DBC) prolongs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) manipulation and increases post-ERCP complications. Several cannulation techniques, including guidewire and cutting-based methods, have been proposed to facilitate the procedure; however, the optimum choice among these approaches remains inconclusive. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the techniques for DBC.

methodsThree major bibliographic databases were reviewed for enrollment of comparative trials which took place prior to January 23, 2024. We included adults diagnosed with DBC and compared two or more of seven possible interventions, including controlled group, precut papillotomy (PP), precut fistulotomy (PF), delayed precut papillotomy (dPP), delayed precut fistulotomy (dPF), transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy (TPS), and the double-guidewire technique (DGW). Our focus was on the deep cannulation rate and any post-ERCP complications, including pancreatitis, bleeding, perforation and infection which may have occurred during the follow-up periods.

resultsSeventeen randomised controlled trials involving a total of 2,189 participants were used in the analyses. When compared with the control group, TPS was shown to be significantly superior to the other techniques in cannulation efficacy (OR 6.00, 95% CI: 1.29 ~ 27.96), while only PF was found to be significantly associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.40 ~ 0.93). Subgroup analysis also found that patients receiving PF experienced significantly less post-ERCP pancreatitis in comparison to the control group, with no differences in being seen in bleeding, perforation or infection after ERCP.

conclusionsFor DBC patients, only TPS achieved better cannulation efficacy, while PF showed a lower complication rate with statistical significance, particularly in post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Indexed as

CatheterizationCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeSphincterotomy, EndoscopicHumansPancreatitisPostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDifficult biliary cannulationDouble-guidewire techniqueNetwork meta-analysisPrecut techniqueTranspancreatic biliary sphincterotomy

Identifiers

PMID42056927
PMCPMC13276943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.