SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2012
Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.
Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
67 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus cholecystectomy versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Transcystic Versus Transductal Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.World journal of surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopic ultrasonography and intraoperative cholangiography in detection of common bile duct stones.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2016Pooled it
- Transcystic or transductal stone extraction during single-stage treatment of choledochocystolithiasis: a systematic review.World journal of surgery · 2014Pooled it
- Single-stage management with combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Trial
- Single-stage vs. two-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones: a prospective randomized trial with long-term follow-up.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Anisodamine accelerates spontaneous passage of single symptomatic bile duct stones ≤ 10 mm.World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Trial
- Dutch-TIMELINESS: optimising choledocholithiasis treatment in the Netherlands - protocol of a national implementation project.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Transcystic and choledochotomy approaches of laparoscopic bile duct exploration show distinct outcomes against ERCP + laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Biliary stent migration after cholecystectomy following a single-preoperative ERCP: insights into real-world bile duct management.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Sequential comparison of single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration combined with cholecystectomy.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration in situs inverse totalis: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Transcystic management of choledocholithiasis: Outcomes, factors associated with bile duct injury and implications for surgical practice.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2025Article
- Review
- The Safety and Cost Analysis of Outpatient Laparoendoscopy in the Treatment of Cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.
methodsFour databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011, were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, number of procedures per patient, length of hospital stay, total operative time, hospitalization charges, patient acceptance and quality of life scores.
resultsSeven eligible RCTs [five trials (n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); two trials (n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE], composed of 787 patients in total, were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios (RR) = -0.10, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.24 to 0.04, P = 0.17], postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: 0.33 to 14.67, P = 0.42), conversion to other procedures (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.70, P = 0.39), length of hospital stay (MD = 0.99, 95% CI: -1.59 to 3.57, P = 0.45), total operative time (MD = 12.14, 95% CI: -1.83 to 26.10, P = 0.09). Two-stage (LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage (LC + LCBDE) management.
conclusionSingle-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures. However, patient's condition, operator's expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.