Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25971374›Full record

ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2015

Surgical management of acute cholecystitis.

Rahul S Koti, Christopher J Davidson, Brian R Davidson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cholecystectomy Vs. Cholecystostomy for the Management of Acute Cholecystitis in Elderly Patients.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison of treatment costs of laparoscopic and open surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2015
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rahul S KotiUniversity Department of Surgery, Royal Free Hospital and UCL Medical School, Pond Street, London, NW3 2QG, UK.
Christopher J Davidson
Brian R Davidson
University College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute cholecystitis occurs in approximately 1% of patients with known gallstones. It presents as a surgical emergency and usually requires hospitalisation for treatment. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in the elderly. Cholecystectomy is advocated for acute cholecystitis; however, the timing of cholecystectomy and the value of the additional treatments have been a matter of debate. This review examines the available evidence regarding the optimal surgical management of patients with acute cholecystitis.

methodsA literature search was performed on the MEDLINE, EMBASE and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, databases for English language publications. The MeSH headings 'cholecystitis', 'acute', 'gallbladder', 'inflammation', 'surgery', 'cholecystectomy', 'laparoscopic', 'robotic', 'telerobotic' and 'computer-assisted' were used.

resultsData from eight randomised controlled trails and three population-based analyses show that early cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis performed on the index admission is safe and not associated with increased conversion rates or morbidity in comparison to conservative treatment followed by elective cholecystectomy. Delaying cholecystectomy increases readmissions for gallstone-related events, complications, hospital stay and mortality in the elderly. Early cholecystectomy is also more cost-effective. Randomised trials addressing antibiotic use in acute cholecystitis suggest that antibiotics should be stopped on the day of cholecystectomy. Insufficient trials have been performed to address the optimal analgesia regime post cholecystectomy. Similarly, a lack of trials on intraoperative cholangiography and management of common bile duct stones in patients with acute cholecystitis means that treatment of concomitant bile duct stones should be based on institutional expertise and resource availability. As regards acute cholecystitis in elderly and high-risk patients, case series and retrospective studies would suggest that cholecystectomy is more effective and of lower mortality than percutaneous cholecystostomy. There is not enough evidence to support the routine use of robotic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) in the treatment of acute cholecystitis.

conclusionsTrial evidence would favour a policy of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy following admission with acute cholecystitis. The optimal approach to support early cholecystectomy is suggested but requires evidence from further randomised trials.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyTime-to-TreatmentCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicCholecystitis, AcuteHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25971374
OpenAlexW267841234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.