ArticleSurgical endoscopy2014
An audit of short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic removal of common bile duct stones in Finland.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Recurrent choledocholithiasis after laparoscopic bile duct exploration: incidence, risk factors, and management strategies.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Feasibility and outcome of transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration as first-line treatment for common bile duct stones: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of T-tube cholangiography and choledochoscopy in residual calculi after biliary surgery.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Residual choledocholithiasis after choledocholithotomy T-tube drainage: what is the best intervention strategy?BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Epidemiological Survey of Different Treatments for Choledocholithiasis in Taiwan: A Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Surgical strategy for recurrent common bile duct stones: a 10-year experience of a single center.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Learning curve for performing choledochotomy bile duct exploration with primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Article
- Use of the AmbuSurgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: 15-year experience in a district general hospital.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic Transcystic Treatment Biliary Calculi by Laser Lithotripsy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimTo audit short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and factors influencing the success of the laparoscopic treatment.
methodsFrom January 1999 to December 2011, 288 patients (93 males) underwent a single-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with LCBDE in two Finnish Hospitals. Short-term outcome data were collected prospectively. Long-term outcomes were examined retrospectively. The main measures of outcome were the success of laparoscopic CBD stone clearance and recurrence of CBD stones in the long-term, with 30-day mortality, morbidity, and the length of postoperative hospital stay as secondary outcome measures.
resultsCBD stones were successfully removed by one-stage laparoscopic procedure in 232 of the 279 patients (83.2%) with verified CBD stones and after conversion to open surgery in additional 28 patients (93.2%). Nineteen patients (6.8%) having residual stones after surgery were successfully treated with postoperative ERCP. On multivariate analysis, the independent factors associated with a failed laparoscopic stone clearance were stone size over 7 mm [OR 3.51 (95% CI 1.53-8.03), p = 0.003], difficult anatomy [OR 18.01 (5.03-64.49), p < 0.001] and transcholedochal approach [OR 2.98 (1.37-4.47), p = 0.006]. Laparoscopic stone clearance also failed in all 11 patients having impacted stones at the ampulla of Vater. Cumulative long-term recurrence rate was 3.6% at 5 years and 6.0 % at 10 years. Thirty-day mortality was 0.3% and morbidity 12.2%. Postoperative hospital stay was median 2 (IQR 1-3) days after transcystic CBD removal and 4 (IQR 3-7) days after transcholedochal CBD removal, p < 0.001.
conclusionOur results show that one-stage LC combined with LCBDE stone clearance is safe and effective in most patients thus reducing the number of additional, potentially dangerous endoscopic procedures. Moreover, large or impacted stones are a risk factor for failed stone clearance.
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.