ReviewSurgical endoscopy2013
Laparoendoscopic rendezvous reduces perioperative morbidity and risk of pancreatitis.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Safety and efficacy comparison of single-stage and two-stage ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Destiny for Rendezvous: Is Cholecysto/Choledocholithiasis Better Treated with Dual- or Single-Step Procedures?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Innovative Techniques Associated with Traditional Abdominal Surgery in Complex Pediatric Cases: A Tertiary Center Experience.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Preoperative endoscopic treatment for the management of concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.La Tunisie medicale · 2021Article
- Simultaneous common bile duct clearance and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: experience of a one-stage approach.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2019Article
- Single-stage procedure for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocolithiasis: a surgical procedures review.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Review
- Cost analysis of laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Laparoendoscopic Rendezvous for Concomitant Cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A Successful Modality Even in the Most Difficult Presentations Including Pregnancy.Case reports in surgery · 2016Article
- Current status of laparoendoscopic rendezvous in the treatment of cholelithiasis with concomitant choledocholithiasis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2015Review
- Modern approach to cholecysto-choledocholithiasis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2014Review
- A modified technique reduced operative time of laparoendoscopic rendezvous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for concomitant gallstone and common bile ductal stone.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: Our patient series over a period of 10 years.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ideal management of cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones still is controversial. Although the two-stage sequential approach remains the prevalent management, several trials have concluded that the so-called laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) technique offers some advantages, such as a reduced risk of post-ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) pancreatitis. This study aimed to compare the single-stage LERV technique with the two-stage endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
methodsA search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LERV and the two-stage sequential approach was conducted. The outcomes considered were overall complications and pancreatitis. Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from 1998 to July 2012. Odds ratios (ORs) were extracted and pooled using a fixed or random-effect model depending on I (2) used as a heterogeneity measure.
resultsFour RCTs, including a total of 430 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The incidence of overall complications was lower in the LERV group (11.2 %) than in the two-stage intervention group (18.1 %) (OR, 0.56; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.99; P = 0.04; I (2) = 45 %). The findings showed that LERV was associated with less clinical pancreatitis (2.4 %) than the two-stage technique (8.4 %) (OR, 0.33; 95 % CI, 0.12-0.91; P = 0.03; I (2) = 33 %).
conclusionsDespite the limitation of a small number of studies completed, the evidence of RCTs shows that LERV is superior to two-stage treatment due to a reduction in overall complications, particularly pancreatitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23052536What 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.