Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42798511›Full record

ReviewEuroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterology

Negative Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Incidence, Predictors, and Clinical Consequences-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Ahmed Salman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Ahmed SalmanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kasr Alainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0026-0841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is widely used for the management of suspected biliary disease; however, a proportion of procedures yield no therapeutic findings, exposing patients to avoidable risks. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the incidence, predictors, and clinical consequences of negative ERCP. A structured review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 principles, including studies of adult patients undergoing ERCP for suspected choledocholithiasis or biliary obstruction. Negative ERCP was defined as the absence of stones, sludge, or any therapeutic intervention. Across included studies, the incidence of negative ERCP ranged from 10 to 40%, with higher rates observed in intermediate-risk populations. Predictors included normalization of liver enzymes, lack of bile duct dilation, smaller or transient stones, and delays between presentation and intervention. Several studies have suggested that spontaneous stone passage is a key contributor. Importantly, negative ERCP was associated with clinically relevant complication rates, including post-ERCP pancreatitis, comparable to those observed in therapeutic procedures. These findings highlight limitations in current risk stratification and emphasize the need for confirmatory diagnostic strategies before ERCP. Reducing unnecessary ERCP has important implications for patient safety, healthcare utilization, and clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

CholedocholithiasisCommon bile duct stonesEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyPost-ERCP pancreatitis

Identifiers

PMID42798511
PMCPMC13612684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.