ArticlePrzeglad gastroenterologiczny2026
Double guidewire cannulation technique versus cannulation over pancreatic stent after unintended pancreatic duct cannulation.
Article in Przeglad gastroenterologiczny, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Selective biliary cannulation is essential for successive endoscopic intervention. Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of the double-guidewire technique (DGT) versus cannulation over a pancreatic stent (CPS) following unintended pancreatic duct cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in real-world clinical practice. Material and methods: We conducted a prospective study including 103 patients who underwent ERCP between June and December 2024 at Kafrelsheikh University Hospital. Patients with difficult biliary cannulation and unintentional guidewire entry into the pancreatic duct during standard wire-guided cannulation were included. In these cases, either the DGT or CPS approach (with or without needle-knife sphincterotomy) was employed. Outcomes such as cannulation success time, number of attempts, and the need for precut sphincterotomy were recorded and analysed. Results: The CPS group had a significantly higher requirement for precut sphincterotomy (88.6%) compared to the DGT group (33.3%) ( Conclusions: The CPS technique required significantly more precut sphincterotomies than DGT. While the number of cannulation attempts was similar between techniques, DGT allowed for faster cannulation. CPS may reduce the risk of complications such as post-ERCP pancreatitis, but DGT appears more time-efficient. Selection of the appropriate technique should be based on individual anatomical and procedural factors.
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.