ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015
Timing and nature of presentation of unsuspected retained common bile duct stones after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Risks of Post-ERCP Adverse Events in Patients with Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Choledocholithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Experience with robotic common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones in comparison to a conventional laparoscopic approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Are We Overtesting? Rethinking Routine Blood Work After Low-Risk Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Biliary complications of surgical procedures: what the radiologist needs to know.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Advancements in Cholelithiasis Diagnosis: A Systematic Review of Machine Learning Applications in Imaging Analysis.Cureus · 2024Review
- Asymptomatic bile duct stones: The devil is in the details.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Article
- Is there a role for routine intraoperative cholangiogram in diagnosing CBD stones in patients with normal liver function tests? A prospective study.Innovative surgical sciences · 2024Article
- The Symptomatic Outcomes of Cholecystectomy for Gallstones.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- A meta-analysis of the use of intraoperative cholangiography; time to revisit our approach to cholecystectomy?Surgery open science · 2021Review
- Cost effectiveness of intraoperative laparoscopic ultrasound for suspected choledocholithiasis; outcomes from a specialist benign upper gastrointestinal unit.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2020Article
- Risk factors for the late development of common bile duct stones after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Routine Cysticotomy and Flushing of the Cystic Duct in Patients with Low Risk of Common Duct Stones: Can It Be Beneficial?Minimally invasive surgery · 2017Article
- Acute biliary pancreatitis in cholecystectomised patients.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2017Article
- Prevalence and characteristics of clinically significant retained common bile duct stones after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2016Article
- Routine ultrasound and blood tests after laparoscopic cholecystectomy-are they worthwhile? A diagnostic accuracy study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2016Article
- Who experiences endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstone disease?Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommon bile duct (CBD) stones may be over looked at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), particularly when intra-operative cholangiography (IOC) is not performed. Currently, there is no data available about the time course and pattern of presentation for stones retained in the CBD at the time of LC. The aim of this study was to establish the time course and pattern of presentation of unsuspected retained CBD stones post LC.
methodsPatients presenting with symptomatic CBD stones from 1994 until 2010, having previously undergone LC were studied in this retrospective, case note review. CBD stones were confirmed at ERCP. Data collected included LC date, mode of presentation, imaging results including CBD diameter, stone appearance, length of stay and post ERCP complications. Patients having an ERCP for stones found on IOC at LC were excluded.
resultsSixty-one patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common mode of presentation was abdominal pain (n = 38, 62%) with (17) or without (21) deranged liver function tests. Nineteen (31%) patients presented with clinical complications of the CBD stones: cholangitis (10), acute biliary pancreatitis (6) or obstructive jaundice (3). The CBD was usually mild-to-moderately dilated (8-15 mm) on ultrasound. The median time span from LC to presentation with CBD stones was 4 years (range: 6 days-18 years). Five (8.2%) patients had a complication from their ERCP; mild pancreatitis (3), bleed (1) and cholangitis (1). Nineteen (31.1%) patients required more than one ERCP to complete stone/stent removal.
conclusionsThe median time for patients to present with symptomatic CBD stones after LC is 4 years. Patients with retrained stones may remain asymptomatic for many years. A third of the patients presented with potentially serious complications of the retained CBD stone. Future studies for CBD stones after LC need to follow patients for at least 10 years.
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.