ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Advances in Minimally Invasive Diagnosis and Treatment Procedures for Pancreaticobiliary Maljunction: A Narrative Review.
Review 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPancreaticobiliary maljunction (PBM) is a congenital anomaly characterized by an abnormal union of thepancreatic and bile ducts outside the duodenal wall, leading to uncontrolled bidirectional refl ux and a markedlyelevated lifetime risk of biliary tract cancer. Prophylactic surgery is therefore indicated, with management evolvingfrom open resection to minimally invasive approaches.
objectiveThis narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence, technical evolution, clinical outcomes, andfuture perspectives of minimally invasive diagnosis and treatment for PBM, with emphasis on laparoscopic androbotic‑assisted surgery, endoscopic interventions, and the necessity of lifelong surveillance.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science,and Scopus for articles published between January 1995 and May 2026, using relevant MeSH terms and keywords.Included studies comprised original research, systematic reviews, meta‑analyses, and clinical guidelines. Data weresynthesized narratively, with priority given to comparative studies and large series from high‑volume centers.
resultsLaparoscopic complete extrahepatic bile duct excision with Roux‑en‑Y hepaticojejunostomy has become thegold standard for PBM with congenital biliary dilatation, off ering equivalent oncological outcomes to open surgerybut with signifi cantly less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and faster recovery. Robotic‑assisted surgery providesenhanced dexterity and visualization, reducing bile leak rates and conversion to open surgery, albeit with longeroperative times and higher costs. Endoscopic interventions (sphincterotomy, common‑channel sphincterotomy) arevaluable as defi nitive therapy in high‑risk surgical patients or as bridging therapy. For isolated PBM without biliarydilatation, the optimal extent of resection remains debated, with cholecystectomy alone or prophylactic bile ductexcision individualized based on age and risk profi le. Long‑term surveillance is mandatory due to persistentlow‑grade malignancy risk in residual epithelium.
conclusionsMinimally invasive approaches have transformed PBM management, establishing laparoscopy asstandard for dilated cases and robotics as a powerful adjunct for complex anatomies. Endoscopic therapy has adefi ned role in select patients. Future advances will likely include molecular risk stratifi cation and artifi cialintelligence‑enhanced imaging. Lifelong structured surveillance remains imperative for all patients, regardless ofsurgical strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42736469What 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.