ArticleWorld journal of surgery2013
Reoperative surgery after repair of postcholecystectomy bile duct injuries: is it worthwhile?
Article in World journal of surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcome of reoperative surgery for late failure of postcholecystectomy bile duct injury repair.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Hepatectomy for bile duct injuries: when is it necessary?World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Article
- Liver transplantation for iatrogenic bile duct injuries sustained during cholecystectomy.Hepatology international · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepeat repair of bile duct injuries (BDIs) after cholecystectomy is technically challenging, and its success remains uncertain. We retrospectively evaluated the short- and long-term outcomes of patients requiring reoperative surgery for BDI at a major referral center for hepatobiliary surgery.
methodsBetween January 1991 and May 2011, we performed surgical BDI repairs in 46 patients. Among them, 22 patients had undergone a previous surgical repair elsewhere (group 1), and 24 patients had no previous repair (group 2). We compared the early and late outcomes in the two groups.
resultsThe patients in group 1 were younger (48.6 vs. 54.8 years, p = 0.0001) and were referred after a longer interval (>1 month) from BDI (72.7 vs. 41.7%, p = 0.042). Intraoperative diagnosis of BDI (59.1 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.001), ongoing cholangitis (45.4 vs. 12.5%; p = 0.02), and delay of repair after referral to our institution (116 ± 34 days vs. 23 ± 9 days; p = 0.001) were significantly more frequent in group 1 than in group 2. No significant differences were found for postoperative mortality, morbidity, or length of stay between the groups. Patients with associated vascular injuries had a higher postoperative morbidity rate (p = 0.01) and associated hepatectomy rate (p = 0.045). After a mean follow-up of 96.6 ± 9.7 months (range 5-237.2 months, median 96 months), the rate of recurrent cholangitis (6.5%) was comparable in the two groups.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that short- and long-term outcomes after surgical repair of BDI are comparable regardless of whether the patient requires reoperative surgery for a failed primary repair. Associated vascular injuries increase postoperative morbidity and the need for liver resection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23188533What 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.