ArticleBMJ open2026
Association between insufficient balloon dilatation during endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation and post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with choledocholithiasis: a multicentre retrospective study in China.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine whether insufficient balloon dilatation during endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) is associated with postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) and prolonged hospitalisation and to identify clinical and anatomical factors related to insufficient dilatation.
designMulticentre retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching analysis.
settingThree tertiary referral hospitals in China: Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, the Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University and the First Affiliated Hospital of Shihezi University.
participantsAmong 3341 patients with choledocholithiasis who underwent EPBD between January 2023 and December 2024, 2970 met the eligibility criteria. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 220 patients were included in the final analysis, including 110 with inadequate balloon dilatation and 110 with adequate dilatation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of PEP, diagnosed by standardised criteria. Secondary outcomes included the length of postoperative hospitalisation and risk factors for insufficient balloon dilatation.
resultsThe incidence of PEP was significantly higher in the insufficient dilatation group compared with the sufficient dilatation group (24.5% vs 8.2%, p=0.002). Multivariate analysis confirmed insufficient dilatation as an independent risk factor for PEP (OR 4.302, 95% CI 1.874 to 9.879, p=0.001), while endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) was a protective factor (OR 0.391, 95% CI 0.178 to 0.858, p=0.019). Insufficient dilatation was also associated with a longer postoperative hospital stay (p=0.002). Furthermore, the presence of a juxtapapillary duodenal diverticulum (JDD) was strongly correlated with a lower likelihood of insufficient dilatation (OR 0.388, 95% CI 0.210 to 0.716, p=0.002).
conclusionsInsufficient balloon dilatation during EPBD is a significant risk factor for PEP. ENBD was associated with a reduced risk. Patients with JDD are more likely to achieve sufficient balloon dilatation. Recognising this sign of insufficient dilatation can help clinicians stratify risk and tailor postprocedural management.
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.