SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2026
Efficacy of indomethacin for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is a prevalent and potentially serious complication in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
aimTo comprehensively assess the efficacy of indomethacin therapy in reducing PEP risk.
methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared rectal indomethacin with a control group to prevent PEP. Duplicates were removed, and studies were included based on the established inclusion criteria. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess the risk of bias in the RCTs. A random-effects model was applied to produce pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsWe included a total of 30 RCTs involving 16977 patients. Compared to the control group, rectal indomethacin showed comparable rates of overall PEP (PEP; RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.69-1.04,
conclusionRectal indomethacin appears to be safe and may offer benefit in selected high-risk patients, though findings should be interpreted with caution due to high heterogeneity.
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.