Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2014
A prospective, randomized study comparing minilaparotomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a day-surgery procedure: 5-year outcome.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Improvement in the quality of life following cholecystectomy: a randomized multicenter study of health status (RAND-36) in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Three-dimensional Laparoscopy (3D-LC)In vivo (Athens, Greece)Trial
- Review
- [Quality of life and visceral surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014Review
- Preliminary Experience with Mini-Laparotomy Cholecystectomy in Jos.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe long-term outcome between laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and minilaparotomy (MC) has not been compared in randomised trials as day-surgery procedures. We therefore investigated the outcome after day-case LC and MC in 48 patients.
methodsInitially 60 patients with noncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease were randomly allocated to a day-case MC (n = 29) or LC (n = 31) over a period of 2 years (2006-2008), and 48 of them (80 %) were reached for a follow-up interview 5.8 (4.8-6.9) years after the surgery.
resultsBaseline parameters were similar in the two groups: 1 of 21 MCs and 2 of 27 LCs were converted to open laparotomy. The prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) 5 years after the procedure was quite similar in the two groups: 3 of 21 (14 %) in the MC group and 1 of 27 (4 %; p = 0.2). Residual abdominal symptoms were common, but the proportion was similar in both groups (43 % in MC and 30 % in LC group, p = 0.26). In the MC group 100 % and in the LC group 89 % (18/21) were satisfied with the cosmetic outcome (p = 0.11). Quality of life (QoL) improved for 16 of 21 (76 %) in the MC group and 26 of 27 (96 %) in the LC group (p = 0.38), and patients in both groups were satisfied with the operation overall.
conclusionsDay-case MC and LC patients have a quite similar long-term outcome with no significant difference regarding residual abdominal symptoms, cosmetic satisfaction, QoL, or CPSP.
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.