Talk:Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Medicine Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01279.x - quite a lot of complications in very large review (16,000 episodes). JFW | T@lk 07:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Risks is currently written in the 2nd person and should be written in the 3rd person. --FearlessRahul 13:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bile washout during ERCP?

Is it routine to wash out bile in this procedure? If yes, does this simply get discarded or are there diagnostic tests that are done on this bile wash out?

Thanks for any input! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.238.224.23 (talk) 15:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should we remove the Cleanup tag?

Hi there. After looking at this article I compared this to another on diagnostic procedure (specifically Esophagogastroduodenoscopy) and found that they had very similar styles with bulleted lists for indications and therapeutics under medical uses. I have edited the article so it is now more streamlined in line with this.

My question is do we really need to change anything so the article has more prose? Unless more information is required to explain each point (which I would be happy to add at some point if needed) I think we should remove the cleanup tag.

Thanks --James Pleasant (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issue?

When searching around for more information about ERCP I found that some of the paragraphs on this article were directly copied from another website (http://zuberi.net/ercp.html) written by Professor Bader Faiyaz Zuberi. The copyright license on that website is unknown so I'm not sure if copying from it infringes Wikipedia's copyright rules. --James Pleasant (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]