Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16395539›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2006

Comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy and laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

D-F Hong, Y Xin, D-W Chen

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D-F HongDepartment of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China.
Y Xin
D-W Chen
Zhejiang University · CNSir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOEST) was compared with laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LCBDE) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis in an attempt tried to find the best mini-invasive treatment for the cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis.

methodsFor this study, 234 patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis diagnosed by preoperative B-ultrasonography and intraoperative cholangiogram were divided at random into an LC-LCBDE group (141 cases) and an LC-IOEST group (93 cases). The surgical times, surgical success rates, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative lengths of stay, and hospital charges were compared prospectively.

resultsThere were no differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time, surgical success rate, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative length of stay, and hospital charge.

conclusionBoth LC-IOEST and LC-LCBDE were shown to be safe, effective, minimally invasive treatments for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicSphincterotomy, EndoscopicAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCholecystolithiasisCholedocholithiasisCommon Bile DuctFemaleHospital ChargesHumansIntraoperative PeriodLaparoscopyLength of StayMale

Identifiers

PMID16395539
OpenAlexW2004446174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.