ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
New Trends in Airway Management During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of endoscopy-specific dual-channel supraglottic airways for upper gastrointestinal endoscopic and transesophageal instrumentation procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate plus propofol for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized controlled study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over time, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) evolved into the preferred method for both diagnosing and treating diseases of the biliary, pancreatic, and ampullary systems. Traditionally performed under "conscious" sedation, anesthesiological management during ERCP increasingly involves the use of general anesthesia (GA) due to the complexity of procedures and patient comorbidities. This narrative review aims to underscore the current absence of definitive evidence supporting a single airway management strategy during ERCP. In each section, we examine the strengths and limitations of various airway management strategies, including spontaneous breathing, endotracheal intubation, and newer techniques such as high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and supraglottic airway devices (SGAs), tailored for endoscopic procedures. We explore and discuss the multifactorial determinants that influence clinical decision-making, including patient-specific risk factors, procedural complexity, resource availability, and potential complications. Any anesthesiological choice must guarantee the immobility of the patient and the versatility of the position and must be integrated with the preferences and skills of the endoscopist, the available means in the endoscopic suite, and the internal protocols. Spontaneous breathing with sedation may be appropriate for low-risk, short-duration procedures but carries risks of hypoventilation and aspiration, while GA with a device to manage airways improves procedural conditions and perioperative risks. Still, it is resource-intensive and may delay recovery. Transitions between different strategies are inherently fluid, reflecting the need for a flexible, patient-centered approach tailored to the specific clinical context. Rigorous future research is essential to establish evidence-based guidelines that enhance both safety and efficiency of airway management in this setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.