ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Current practices in biliary surgery: Do we practice what we teach?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Critical view of safety approach vs. infundibular technique in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which one is safer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- SAGES safe cholecystectomy modules improve practicing surgeons' judgment: results of a randomized, controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for duplication of the gallbladder: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Surgical Repair of Bile Duct Injuries Due to Cholecystectomy-An Experience from a Referral Center in Slovenia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- CRITICAL VIEW OF SAFETY: A PROSPECTIVE SURGICAL AND PHOTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS IN LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY - DOES IT HELP TO PREVENT IATROGENIC LESIONS?Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Article
- Intra-operative ultrasound assessment of the biliary tree during robotic cholecystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Review
- A Systematic Review of Laparoscopic Ultrasonography During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Cureus · 2023Review
- When Critical View of Safety Fails: A Practical Perspective on Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Laparoscopic modified fundus-down cholecystectomy technique: an alternative method for performing a safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy: how to article.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- How to achieve the critical view of safety for safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Technical aspects.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the knowledge of the critical view of safety and recognition of the transoperative complexity during the laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- The critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Strasberg Yes or No? An Italian Multicentre study.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Knowledge of the Culture of Safety in Cholecystectomy (COSIC) Among Surgical Residents: Do We Train Them Well For Future Practice?World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Recommendation for cholecystectomy protocol based on intraoperative ultrasound - a single-centre retrospective case-control study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the usefulness of the SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program from the viewpoint of the European surgeon.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2020Article
- Iatrogenic bile duct injury: impact and management challenges.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Laparoscopic ultrasonography as an alternative to intraoperative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSince the widespread adoption of laparoscopic techniques in biliary surgery, the incidence of bile duct injures (BDI) has not significantly declined despite increased operative experience and recognition of the critical view of safety (CVS) method for anatomic identification. We hypothesized that operative approaches in clinical practice may vary from well-described technical recommendations. The objective of this study was to access how practicing surgeons commonly identify anatomy during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).
methodsWe performed a cohort study assessing practices in biliary surgery among current practicing surgeons. Surgeons belonging to the Midwest Surgical Association and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons were surveyed. Items surveyed include preferred methods for cystic duct identification, recognition of the CVS, and use of intraoperative imaging.
resultsIn total, 374 of 849 surgeons responded. The CVS was not correctly identified by 75 % of surgeons descriptively and by 21 % of surgeons visually. 56 % of surgeons practiced the infundibular method for identification of the cystic duct; 27 % practiced the CVS method. Intraoperative cholangiography was used by 16 % and laparoscopic ultrasound by <1 %.
conclusionA majority of surgeons preferably do not use the CVS method of identification during LC. A large percentage of practicing surgeons are unable to describe or visually identify the CVS. These results suggest an urgent need to reexamine the tenets of how LC is being taught and disseminated and present a clear target for improvement to reduce BDI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26541721What 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.