Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis

van Baal, M C, van Santvoort, H C, Bollen, T L, Bakker, O J, Besselink, M G, Gooszen, H G·2011·Journal of British Surgery

Abstract

Background: The role of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients with (infected) necrotizing pancreatitis was evaluated. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were: consecutive cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis undergoing PCD as primary treatment for peripancreatic collections; indication for PCD either (suspected) infected necrosis or symptomatic sterile pancreatic necrosis; and outcomes reported to include percentage of infected peripancreatic collections, need for additional surgical necrosectomy, complications and deaths. Exclusion criteria were: cohort of fewer than five patients; cohort included patients with chronic pancreatitis; selected subgroup of patients with acute pancreatitis studied, such as those with pseudocysts, pancreatic abscesses and/or exclusively sterile pancreatic necrosis; and cohort in which PCD was combined with another minimally invasive strategy and results for PCD alone not reported separately. Results: Eleven studies, including 384 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only one study was a randomized controlled trial; most others were retrospective case series. Four studies reported on the presence of organ failure before PCD; this occurred in 67·2 per cent of 116 patients. Infected necrosis was proven in 271 (70·6 per cent) of 384 patients. No additional surgical necrosectomy was required after PCD in 214 (55·7 per cent) of 384 patients. Complications consisted mostly of internal and external pancreatic fistulas. The overall mortality rate was 17·4 per cent (67 of 384 patients). Nine of 11 studies reported mortality separately for patients with infected necrosis undergoing PCD; the mortality rate in this group was 15·4 per cent (27 of 175). Conclusion: A considerable number of patients can be treated with PCD without the need for surgical necrosectomy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.7304

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
van Baal, M. C., van Santvoort, H. C., Bollen, T. L., Bakker, O. J., Besselink, M. G., & Gooszen, H. G.
Venue
Journal of British Surgery
Published
2011-01-01
Volume
98
Issue
1
Pages
18-27
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
OpenAlex
W2052118586
Cited by
358
References
43
FWCI
3.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bjs.7304
The paper
van Baal, M. C., van Santvoort, H. C., Bollen, T. L., Bakker, O. J., Besselink, M. G., & Gooszen, H. G. (2011). Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis. Journal of British Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7304

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.