Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22350244›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2012

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus open surgery: comparative prospective randomized trial.

V V Grubnik, A I Tkachenko, V V Ilyashenko, K O Vorotyntseva

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Guideline
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Comparing One-Stage vs Two-Stage Approaches for the Management of Choledocholithiasis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

V V GrubnikDepartment of Surgery, Clinical Hospital, Odessa, Ukraine.
A I Tkachenko
V V Ilyashenko
K O Vorotyntseva
Odesa I. I. Mechnikov National University · UA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to analyse safety and benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration compared to open. Prospective randomized trial included a total of 256 patients with CBD stones operated from 2005 to 2009 years in a single center. There were two groups of patients: group I-laparoscopic CBD exploration (138 patients), group II-open CBD exploration (118 patients). Patient comorbidity was assessed by means of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score; i.e. ASA II-109 patients, ASA III-59 patients. Bile duct stones were visualized preoperatively by means of US examination in 129 patients, by means of ERCP in 26 patients, by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in 72 patients. Preoperative evaluation was done through medical history, biochemical tests and ultrasonography. There was no statistical significant difference between 2 groups of patients. No mortality occurred. The mean duration of laparoscopic operations was 82 min (range, 40-160 min). The mean duration of open operations were 90 min (range, 60-150 min). Mean blood loss was much less in laparoscopic group than in open group (20 ± 2 vs. 285 ± 27 ml; p < 0.01). Postoperative complications were observed is nine patients of laparoscopic group and in 15 patients in open group (p < 0.01). There were 102 attempts to perform transcystic exploration of CBD. External drainage was used in 25 (32.8%) patients with transcystic approach. Conversion to laparotomy was performed in two patients. Open operations were performed in 118 patients with choledocholithiasis. External drainage was used in 85% of patients. Morbidity in open group was higher (12.7%) than in laparoscopic group (6.5%). Laparoscopic CBD exploration can be performed with high efficiency, minimal morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic procedures have advances over open operations in terms of postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood Loss, SurgicalCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeCholangiopancreatography, Magnetic ResonanceCommon Bile DuctFemaleGallstonesHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID22350244
OpenAlexW2147884551

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.