Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26139961›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of surgery2015

Management of Bile Duct Injury at Various Stages of Presentation: Experience from a Tertiary Care Centre.

Md Ibrarullah, S Sankar, K Sreenivasan, S R K Gavini

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 82% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Endoscopic restoration of completely transected and prolapsed common bile duct.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Md IbrarullahDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Porur Chennai, 600116 India.
S SankarDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Porur Chennai, 600116 India.
K SreenivasanDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Porur Chennai, 600116 India.
S R K GaviniDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Porur Chennai, 600116 India.
Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical presentation, management and outcome of all patients with bile duct injury who presented to our tertiary care centre at various stages after cholecystectomy were analyzed. The patients were categorized into three groups: group A-patients in whom the injury was detected during cholecystectomy, group B-patients who presented within 2 weeks of cholecystectomy and group C-patients who presented after 2 weeks of cholecystectomy. Our team acted as rescue surgeons and performed 'on-table' repair for injuries occurring in another unit or in another hospital. Strasberg classification of bile duct injury was followed. In group A, partial and complete transections were managed by repair over T-tube and high hepaticojejunostomy, respectively. Patients in group B underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiogram and/or magnetic resonance cholangiogram to evaluate the biliary tree. Those with intact common bile duct underwent endoscopic papillotomy and stenting in addition to drainage of intra-abdominal collection when present. For those with complete transection, early repair was considered if there was no sepsis. In presence of intra-abdominal sepsis an attempt was made to create controlled external biliary fistula. This was followed by hepatico jejunostomy at least after 3 months. Group C patients underwent hepaticojejunostomy at least 6 weeks after the injury. The outcome was graded into three categories: grade A-no clinical symptoms, normal LFT; grade B-no clinical symptoms, mild derangement of LFT or occasional episodes of pain or fever; grade C-pain, cholangitis and abnormal LFT; grade D-surgical revision or dilatation required. Fifty nine patients were included in the study and the distribution was group A-six patients, group B-33 patients and group C-20 patients. In group A, one patient with complete transection of the right hepatic duct (type C) and partial injury to left hepatic duct (LHD) underwent right hepaticojejunostomy and repair of the LHD over stent. Two patients with type D and three patients with type E 2 injury underwent repair over T-tube and hepaticojejunostomy, respectively. In group B, all except one of the 18 patients with type A injury underwent endoscopic papillotomy and stenting. The bile leak subsided at a mean interval of 8 days in all, except one patient who died of fulminant sepsis. Of the 15 patients with type E injury, five underwent hepaticojejunostomy after a minimum gap of 3 months. Early repair was considered in 10 patients. Twenty patients in group C underwent hepaticojejunostomy. In a mean follow-up of 40 months, the outcome was grade A in 54 patients, grade B in three patients (one from each of the three groups) and grade D in one patient (group C). The latter patient with a type E3 injury developed recurrent stricture and cholangitis necessitating percutaneous transhepatic dilatation. The high success rate of bile duct repair in the present study can be attributed to the appropriate timing, meticulous technique and the tertiary care experience.

Indexed as

Benign biliary strictureBile duct injuryCholecystectomy

Identifiers

PMID26139961
PMCPMC4484527
OpenAlexW2136194754

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.