Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36381817›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

Laparoscopic-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-Directed Transgastric ERCP in Patients With Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Victor L de Oliveira, Diogo Turiani H de Moura, Epifânio S do Monte Júnior, Igor M Proença, Igor B Ribeiro, Sergio A Sánchez-Luna, Pedro Henrique Boraschi V Ribas, Matheus C Hemerly, Wanderley M Bernardo, Eduardo Guimarães H de Moura

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

10 authors.

Victor L de OliveiraGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Diogo Turiani H de MouraGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Epifânio S do Monte JúniorGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Igor M ProençaGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Igor B RibeiroGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Sergio A Sánchez-LunaGastroenterology, University of Alabama at Birmingham Marnix E. Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, USA.
Pedro Henrique Boraschi V RibasGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Matheus C HemerlyGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Wanderley M BernardoGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.
Eduardo Guimarães H de MouraGastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a therapeutic procedure for skilled endoscopists that can be even more challenging in some situations, including patients' post-Roux-en-y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) surgery. There is still no consensus on whether laparoscopic-assisted ERCP (LA-ERCP) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) is the most appropriate, safe, and feasible approach in patients with this type of post-surgical anatomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine both approaches' feasibility, efficacy, and safety in this situation. We searched for electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Lilacs, Google Scholar, and Central Cochrane) to identify studies comparing LA-ERCP versus EDGE. Outcomes measured included technical success, adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs, length of stay (LOS), and procedural time. Descriptive data related to the EDGE procedure was also extracted. The risk of bias and the quality of evidence of the enrolled studies were assessed. Five studies, totalizing 268 patients (176 LA-ERCP and 92 EDGE), were included. There was no statistical difference in technical success and AEs between groups; however, the LOS and procedural times were shorter for the EDGE group. High rates of fistula closure and no weight regain were observed in EDGE. Both methods are feasible and safe techniques to perform ERCP in patients with RYGB anatomy, with comparable technical success and adverse events rate. However, EDGE is associated with shorter LOS and procedural time.

Indexed as

endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ercp)endoscopic ultrasound (eus)endoscopylaparoscopyroux-en-y gastric bypass (rygb)surgery

Identifiers

PMID36381817
PMCPMC9649332

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.