ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of bile duct stones.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An unexpected challenge: intra-abdominal neurofibromatosis during biliary reconstruction: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current surgical treatments for bile duct stones (BDSs) demonstrate suboptimal efficacy, warranting further exploration of superior therapies or improvement of existing surgical protocols.
aimTo assess the therapeutic efficacy and safety profiles of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)
methodsThis study enrolled 103 consecutive patients with BDSs treated at the First People's Hospital of Changde from January 2024 to January 2025, with 53 patients undergoing ERCP (ERCP group) and 50 receiving conventional CBDE (CBDE group). Comprehensive comparative analyses were conducted across multiple parameters, including clinical efficacy, surgical success rate, safety (bile leakage incidence, surgical site infection, acute pancreatitis, and acute cholangitis), postoperative biochemical markers (total bilirubin and serum amylase), surgery-related metrics (stone removal time, procedure duration, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization time), and postoperative recovery indicators (time to intestinal recovery, jaundice resolution, biliary drainage removal, and postoperative activity recovery).
resultsThe ERCP group demonstrated markedly superior overall efficacy than the CBDE group, with similar surgical success rates and comparable stone removal durations. Importantly, patients undergoing ERCP experienced fewer complications overall, required less operative time, had minimal intraoperative blood loss, and needed shorter hospitalization periods. Recovery parameters such as bowel function recovery, jaundice resolution, biliary stent removal, and normal activity resumption, were significantly improved in the ERCP group. Both groups demonstrated substantial postoperative reductions in total bilirubin and amylase, with no significant intergroup differences.
conclusionERCP demonstrates effectiveness and safety in managing BDSs, thereby providing notable clinical benefits that support its broader implementation in medical practice.
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.