ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Clinical Utility and Optimal Sampling Timing of Urinary Trypsinogen-2 for Early Prediction of Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is essential for pancreatobiliary diseases but carries a risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Early prediction of PEP is crucial; thus, urinary trypsinogen-2 (UT2) is a potential biomarker, but its role and optimal measurement timing remain unclear.
methodsThis single-center prospective study enrolled consecutive patients undergoing their first ERCP at our institution between February 2022 and June 2024. Patients with choledochojejunostomy, biliary pancreatitis, or hemodialysis were excluded. The diagnostic performance of UT2 was evaluated immediately, 1 h, and 3 h after ERCP, and compared with serum amylase (AMY) measured 3 h after ERCP.
resultsOf 521 patients screened, 337 were analyzed (median age 74 years, 64% male). PEP occurred in 10% (mild 8.6%, moderate 1.2%, severe 0.3%). UT2 was positive prior to ERCP in 28.5% of patients and was more frequent among older patients and those with pancreatic cancer. UT2 sensitivity peaked at 1 h and remained stable thereafter. UT2 at 1 h showed higher sensitivity than AMY at 3 h (64.7% vs 52.9%) but lower specificity (64.7% vs 92.7%) and accuracy (64.7% vs 88.7%). In the subgroup analysis of patients with negative baseline UT2, specificity and accuracy were 87.1 and 83.8%, respectively, comparable to those of AMY (91.7% and 88.0%).
conclusionAlthough the diagnostic performance of UT2 was lower than that of AMY, its performance plateaued at 1 h, suggesting that UT2 may facilitate earlier prediction of PEP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42642524What 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.