ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Patient-centered outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review.BJS open · 2022Pooled it
- Measurement of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Integrating Nonpharmacological Options Into Perioperative Pain Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Fascial Closure vs. Non-closure of Right Working Port Sites in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Obesity surgery · 2025Trial
- Safety and Efficacy of Trocar Port-Site Closure Using a Biological Plug Closure in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: a Prospective Study.Obesity surgery · 2022Review
- Article
- A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality of life reporting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2019Review
- Patient reported outcomes in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2019Article
- Comparing how anxiety is experienced between white and minority patients after local therapy for prostate cancer: A hypothesis-generating pilot study.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2019Article
- Cost analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Quality of life and psychological and gastrointestinal symptoms after cholecystectomy: a population-based cohort study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Consistency of patient-reported outcomes after cholecystectomy and their implications on current surgical practice: a prospective multicenter cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a descriptive and comparative review.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2015Review
- Patient-reported outcomes of symptomatic cholelithiasis patients following cholecystectomy after at least 5 years of follow-up: a long-term prospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Wound complications following laparoscopic surgery in a nigerian hospital.Nigerian journal of surgery : official publication of the Nigerian Surgical Research Society · 2014Article
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
backgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the second most common general surgical operation performed in the United States, yet little has been reported on patient-centered outcomes.
methodsWe prospectively followed 100 patients for 2 years as part of an institutional review board-approved study. The Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) was used to quantify quality-of-life (QoL) values at various time points postoperatively.
resultsMaximum pain was reported at 24 h (5.5 ± 2.2), and decreased to preoperative levels at 7 days (1.2 ± 2.3 vs. 2.0 ± 1.6, P = 0.096). Bowel function improved from before the operation to 3 weeks after surgery (10.7 ± 3.8 vs. 12.0 ± 3.2, P < 0.05), but then regressed to preoperative levels. Physical function worsened from before surgery (31.7 ± 6.2) to 1 week (27.5 ± 5.9, P < 0.0001), but surpassed preoperative levels at 3 weeks (33.5 ± 3.4, P < 0.01). Return to the activities of daily living occurred at 6.3 ± 4.7 days and work at 11.1 ± 9.0 days. Fatigue increased from before surgery (15.8 ± 6.2) to week 1 (20.7 ± 6.6, P < 0.0001) before improving at week 3 (14.0 ± 5.8, P < 0.01). Forty-four patients contacted the health care team 61 times before their 3 weeks appointment, most commonly for wound issues (26.2%), pain (24.6%), and gastrointestinal issues (24.6%). Seventy-two percent reported that the procedure had no negative effect on cosmesis at 6 months. Satisfaction with the procedure was high, averaging 9.52 out of 11.
conclusionsQoL is significantly affected in the 24 h after LC but returns to baseline at week 3. Cosmesis and overall satisfaction are high, and QoL improvements are maintained in the long term except for bowel function, which regresses to preoperative levels of impairment. Analysis of patient-initiated contacts after LC may provide feedback on discharge counseling to increase patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23943114What 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.