ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Cost analysis of laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- One-Stage Intraoperative ERCP combined with Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus Two-Stage Preoperative ERCP Followed by Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Management of Gallbladder with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Meta-analysis.Advances in therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Two institutes' experience in laparoendoscopic "rendezvous" technique for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for stones in the gallbladder and bile duct: a prospective randomized comparative clinical trial.Updates in surgery · 2024Trial
- Article
- One-stage approach to cholecystocholedocholithiasis treatment: a feasible surgical strategy for emergency settings and frail patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Destiny for Rendezvous: Is Cholecysto/Choledocholithiasis Better Treated with Dual- or Single-Step Procedures?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Postoperative rendezvous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography as an option in the management of choledocholithiasis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis: a retrospectively cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Direct medical cost and cost analysis of COVID-19 in Iran: A multicenter cross-sectional study.International journal of critical illness and injury scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence from controlled trials and meta-analyses suggests that laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) is preferable to sequential treatment in the management of common bile duct stones. MATERIALS AND
methodsWith this retrospective analysis of a prospective database that included consecutive patients treated for cholecystocholedocholithiasis at our institution between January 2007 and July 2015, we compared LERV with sequential treatment. The primary endpoint was global cost, defined as the cost/patient/hospital stay, and the secondary end points were efficacy and morbidity. Fisher's exact test or Mann-Whitney test was used.
resultsOf a total of 249 consecutive patients, 143 underwent LERV (group A) and 106 a two-stage procedure (group B). Based on an average cost of €613 for 1 day of hospital stay in the General Surgery Department, the overall median cost of treatment was €6403 for group A and €8194 for group B (p < 0.001). Operative time was significantly shorter (p < 0.001), and length of hospital stay was significantly longer for group B (p < 0.001). No mortality in either group was observed. The postoperative complications rate was significantly higher in group B than in group A (24.5 vs. 10.5%; p = 0.003). No significant difference in the postoperative pancreatitis rate or the number of patients with increased serum amylase at 24 h was observed in either group.
conclusionOur study suggests that LERV is preferable to sequential treatment not only in terms of less morbidity, but also of lower costs accrued by a shorter hospital stay. However, the longer operative time raises multiple organizational issues in the coordination of surgery and endoscopy services.
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.