Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 489

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Efficacy of Endoscopic Sphincterotomy after Cholecystectomy in Patients with Sphincter-of-Oddi Dysfunction

Geenen, Joseph E., Hogan, Walter J., Dodds, Wylie J., Toouli, James, Venu, Rama P.·1989·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Forty-seven patients thought to have dysfunction of the sphincter of Oddi were randomly assigned to undergo endoscopic sphincterotomy or sham sphincterotomy in a prospective double-blind study. All the patients had pain resembling biliary pain, had previously undergone a cholecystectomy, and had clinical characteristics suggesting biliary obstruction. The patients were randomly assigned to the treatment (n = 23) or nontreatment (n = 24) group before manometric examination of the sphincter of Oddi was performed. Sphincterotomy resulted in improvement in pain scores at one-year follow-up in 10 of 11 patients with elevated sphincter pressure. In contrast, there was improvement in only 3 of 12 patients with elevated basal sphincter pressures who underwent the sham procedure. In patients with normal sphincter pressure, pain scores were similar regardless of treatment. After one year, sphincterotomy was performed in 12 symptomatic patients who had undergone the sham procedure--7 with elevated sphincter pressures and 5 with normal sphincter pressures. Forty patients were followed for four years. Of the 23 patients with increased sphincter pressure, 10 of the original 11 who underwent sphincterotomy remained virtually free of pain; 7 others who subsequently underwent sphincterotomy also benefited from it. Thus, 17 of 18 patients with sphincter-of-Oddi dysfunction verified by manometry benefited from sphincterotomy. In patients with normal sphincter pressure, sphincterotomy was no more beneficial than sham therapy. Our observations suggest that endoscopic sphincterotomy offers long-term relief of pain in a group of patients with verified sphincter-of-Oddi dysfunction.

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 · 10.1056/nejm198901123200203

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 489

Metadata

Authors
Geenen, J. E., Hogan, W. J., Dodds, W. J., Toouli, J., & Venu, R. P.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1989-01-12
Volume
320
Issue
2
Pages
82-87
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2330014007
Cited by
489
References
0
FWCI
20.04
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: The Efficacy of Endoscopic Sphincterotomy after Cholecystectomy in Patients with Sphincter-of-Oddi Dysfunction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198901123200203
The paper
Geenen, J. E., Hogan, W. J., Dodds, W. J., Toouli, J., & Venu, R. P. (1989). The Efficacy of Endoscopic Sphincterotomy after Cholecystectomy in Patients with Sphincter-of-Oddi Dysfunction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198901123200203

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.