Retrospective Cohort Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Methodol. Dec 20, 2025; 15(4): 105053
Published online Dec 20, 2025. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v15.i4.105053
Table 1 Characteristics of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in hospital, n (%)
Variable

Total study population433245
Female248856 (57.44)
Mean age in years59.9
Insurance provider
Medicare209257 (48.30)
Medicaid66200 (15.28)
Private134912 (31.14)
Uninsured22876 (5.28)
Charlson comorbidity index
0168749 (38.95)
189378 (20.63)
256148 (12.96)
3 or more118970 (27.46)
Median income in patient zip code
$1–$38999121611 (28.07)
$39000–$47999114680 (26.47)
$48000–$62999107401 (24.79)
$6300089553 (20.67)
Hospital region
Northwest74864 (17.28)
Midwest96180 (22.20)
South164806 (38.04)
West97395 (22.48)
Hospital location
Rural20276 (4.68)
Urban412969 (95.32)
Hospital size
Small67586 (15.60)
Medium119965 (27.69)
Large245694 (56.71)
Teaching hospital311243 (71.84)
Race
White290187 (66.98)
Black41071 (9.48)
Hispanic67759 (15.64)
Asian or Pacific Islander16203 (3.74)
Native American3555 (0.82)
Other14470 (3.34)
Weekend admission102235 (23.60)
Table 2 Characteristics of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram in hospital: Atrial fibrillation vs no-atrial fibrillation, n (%)
Variable
With AF: 49615
Without AF: 383630
P value
Female22475 (45.30)226380 (59.01)< 0.01
Mean age in years76.4057.70< 0.01
Insurance provider< 0.01
Medicare41910 (84.47)167032 (43.54)
Medicaid1677 (3.38)64641 (16.85)
Private5596 (11.28)129475 (33.75)
Uninsured432 (0.87)22482 (5.86)
Charlson comorbidity index< 0.01
07482 (15.08)161239 (42.03)
19015 (18.17)80370 (20.95)
29104 (18.35)47071 (12.27)
3 or more24014 (48.40)94950 (24.75)
Median income in patient zip code< 0.01
$1–$3899911987 (24.16)109603 (28.57)
$39000–$4799913639 (27.49)101048 (26.34)
$48000–$6299912503 (25.2)94910 (24.74)
$6300011486 (23.15)78069 (20.35)
Hospital region< 0.01
Northwest10141 (20.44)64718 (16.87)
Midwest11958 (24.10)84206 (21.95)
South17494 (35.26)147314 (38.40)
West10022 (20.20)87392 (22.78)
Hospital location0.05
Rural2128 (4.29)18145 (4.73)
Urban47487 (95.71)365485 (95.27)
Hospital size< 0.05
Small7124 (14.36)59424 (15.49)
Medium13922 (28.06)106073 (27.65)
Large28569 (57.58)218133 (56.86)
Teaching hospital35772 (72.10)275446 (71.80)0.59
Race< 0.01
White41309 (83.26)249282 (64.98)
Black2575 (5.19)38516 (10.04)
Hispanic2789 (5.62)64526 (16.82)
Asian or Pacific Islander1567 (3.16)14654 (3.82)
Native American264 (0.53)3302 (0.86)
Other1111 (2.24)13350 (3.48)
Weekend admission11932 (24.05)90306 (23.54)0.27
Table 3 Top 5 most common primary diagnosis in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram
Serial number
Diagnosis
1Sepsis, unspecified organism
2Obstruction of bile duct
3Calculus of bile duct without cholangitis or cholecystitis without obstruction
4Calculus of bile duct without cholangitis or cholecystitis with obstruction
5Biliary acute pancreatitis
Table 4 Outcomes in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram: Atrial fibrillation vs no-atrial fibrillation
Study population with ERCP (n = 433245)

Outcomes
Without AF
With AF (multivariate regression)
P value
With AF (after propensity matching)
P value
1In-hospital mortality1.13%3.82%
ORRef3.46< 0.013.29< 0.01
AORRef1.93< 0.011.74< 0.01
2Mean time to ERCP (days)2.132.942.97
Adjusted coefficientRef+0.8< 0.01+0.50< 0.01
3Mean length of stay (days)5.68.12
Adjusted coefficientRef+1.71< 0.01+1.56< 0.01
4Mean total charge ($)79963106017100359
Adjusted coefficient ($)Ref21209< 0.0117972< 0.01
5Mean total cost ($)1921425534
Adjusted coefficient ($)Ref4869< 0.01Not applicable
6Shock3.26%10.27%
ORRef3.39< 0.013.24< 0.01
AORRef2.17< 0.012.04< 0.01
7Sepsis3.32%6.30%
ORRef1.95< 0.011.96< 0.01
AORRef1.34< 0.011.30< 0.01
8Intensive care unit admission2.30%7.27%
ORRef3.31< 0.013.08< 0.01
AORRef2.41< 0.012.31< 0.01
9Acute kidney injury12.7%29.47%
ORRef2.87< 0.012.76< 0.01
AORRef1.51< 0.011.42< 0.01
10Blood transfusion0.29%0.49%
ORRef1.69< 0.011.67< 0.05
AORRef1.370.081.150.57
11Home discharge78.2%48.34%
ORRef0.26< 0.010.27< 0.01
AORRef0.59< 0.010.62< 0.01
Table 5 Outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram 0-24 hours vs 24-48 hours vs 48-72 hours vs > 72 hours, n (%)
Patients getting ERCP with AF (n = 49615)

Outcomes
ERCP 0-24 hours
ERCP 24-48 hours
P value
ERCP 48-72 hours
P value
ERCP > 72 hours
P value
19900 (40.10)9005 (18.14)6180 (12.45)14530 (29.28)
1In-hospital mortality3.46%2.55%3.07%5.4%
ORRef0.720.060.880.501.58< 0.01
AORRef0.710.050.860.431.47< 0.01
2Mean length of stay
Adjusted coefficient(days)Ref0.65< 0.011.74< 0.016.5< 0.01
3Mean total charge ($)
Adjusted coefficient ($)Ref19180.4511861< 0.0169150< 0.01
4Mean total cost
Adjusted coefficient ($)Ref1970.682628< 0.0116933< 0.01
5Shock10.42%7.27%6.71%13.45%
ORRef0.67< 0.010.61< 0.011.33< 0.01
AORRef0.65< 0.010.60< 0.011.30< 0.01
6Sepsis6.80%5.49%5.17%6.60%
ORRef0.760.60.74< 0.050.960.74
AORRef0.80.070.72< 0.050.990.90
7Intensive care unit admission7.01%4.27%5.01%10.46%
ORRef0.59< 0.010.70< 0.011.54< 0.01
AORRef0.57< 0.010.70< 0.011.46< 0.01
8Acute kidney injury25.12%25.76%28.72%38.05%
ORRef1.030.61.20< 0.051.8< 0.01
AORRef0.980.81.130.111.72< 0.01
9Blood transfusion0.5%0.16%0.24%0.72%
ORRef0.300.050.430.181.300.39
AORRef0.20< 0.010.440.191.040.89
10Home discharge56.39%55.10%50.54%39.26%
ORRef0.940.360.79< 0.010.49< 0.01
AORRef0.990.970.85< 0.050.48< 0.01

  • Citation: Bangolo AI, Donepudi RC, Nagesh VK, Sandrugu J, Kianifar Aguilar I, Sarraf R, Suliman S, Wadhwani N, Espinoza CEA, Tran HHV, Levy C, Alqinai B, Rambaransingh A, Adibeig M, Ghosal A, Siddiqui G, Bhandari N, Kotnani S, Akrama AA, Thota A, Gill H, Aziz R, Lee CH, Abbisetty SD, Bhangu S, Randhawa K, Habib Z, Khan SA, Lee CYF, Sanoh M, Jacobson K, Lo A, Weissman S. Impact of atrial fibrillation in hospitalized patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A nationwide analysis. World J Methodol 2025; 15(4): 105053
  • URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2222-0682/full/v15/i4/105053.htm
  • DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v15.i4.105053