SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
T-tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing primary duct closure and T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Pooled it
- T-tube drainage versus primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Cholangitis, Choledocholithiasis and a Cholecystocolonic Fistula: A Case Report on a Rare Triple Surgical Challenge.Case reports in surgery · 2026Article
- Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration in situs inverse totalis: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Clinical application of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration and J-Tube drainage.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Strangulated cholecystitis in an umbilical hernia: world-first case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of the clinical effects of dual-modality endoscopy and traditional laparotomy for the treatment of intra- and extrahepatic bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- A comparison of the therapeutic outcomes between primary duct closure and T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a single-centre retrospective study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Comparative study of three common bile duct closure techniques after choledocholithotomy: safety and efficacy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Contemporary management of concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones: a survey of Spanish surgeons.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Management of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis: Endoscopic and surgical approaches.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Spontaneous common bile duct perforation in full term pregnancy: a rare case report and review of literature.BMC surgery · 2021Review
- Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Comprehensive and innovative techniques for laparoscopic choledocholithotomy: A surgical guide to successfully accomplish this advanced manipulation.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Bile Duct Injuries Associated With 55,134 Cholecystectomies: Treatment and Outcome from a National Perspective.World journal of surgery · 2016Article
- Use of biliary stent in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBetween 5% and 11% of people undergoing cholecystectomy have common bile duct stones. Stones may be removed at the time of cholecystectomy by opening and clearing the common bile duct. The optimal technique is unclear.
objectivesThe aim is to assess the benefits and harms of T-tube drainage versus primary closure without biliary stent after open common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until April 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials comparing T-tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two of four authors independently identified the studies for inclusion and extracted data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects model using Review Manager (RevMan) analyses. For each outcome we calculated the risk ratio (RR), rate ratio (RaR), or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on intention-to-treat analysis. MAIN
resultsWe included six trials randomising 359 participants, 178 to T-tube drainage and 181 to primary closure. All trials were at high risk of bias. There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (4/178 (weighted percentage 1.2%) in the T-tube group versus 1/181 (0.6%) in the primary closure group; RR 2.25; 95% CI 0.55 to 9.25; six trials). There was no significant difference in the serious morbidity rate between the two groups (24/136 (weighted serious morbidity rate, 145 events per 1000 patients) in the T-tube group versus 9/136 (weighted serious morbidity rate, 66 events per 1000 patients) in the primary closure group; RaR 2.19; 95% CI 0.98 to 4.91; four trials). Quality of life and return to work were not reported in any of the trials. The operating time was significantly longer in the T-tube drainage group compared with the primary closure group (MD 28.90 minutes; 95% CI 17.18 to 40.62 minutes; one trial). The hospital stay was significantly longer in the T-tube drainage group compared with the primary closure group (MD 4.72 days; 95% CI 0.83 days to 8.60 days; five trials). AUTHORS'
conclusionsT-tube drainage appeared to result in significantly longer operating time and hospital stay compared with primary closure without any apparent evidence of benefit on clinically important outcomes after open common bile duct exploration. Based on the currently available evidence, there is no justification for the routine use of T-tube drainage after open common bile duct exploration in patients with common bile duct stones. T-tube drainage should not be used outside well designed randomised clinical trials. More randomised trials comparing the effects of T-tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration may be needed. Such trials should be conducted with low risk of bias and assessing the long-term beneficial and harmful effects of T-tube drainage, including long-term complications such as bile stricture and recurrence of common bile duct stones.
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.