ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2017
Appropriate Patient Selection Is Essential for the Success of Primary Closure After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Greater than or equal to 8 mm is a safe diameter of common bile duct for primary duct closure: single-arm meta-analysis and systematic review.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Primary duct closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a meta-analysis.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2021Pooled it
- T-Tube Use After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Can laparoscopic common bile duct exploration be performed without any drainage? A propensity score-matched study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure could be safely performed among elderly patients with choledocholithiasis.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Comparison of Primary Suture and T-Tube Drainage After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Combined with Intraoperative Choledochoscopy in the Treatment of Secondary Common Bile Duct Stones: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2022Article
- Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- The Safety and Efficacy of Primary Duct Closure without Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage after Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration.Gastrointestinal tumors · 2020Article
- Primary closure with knotless barbed suture versus traditional T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a single-center medium-term experience.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Adverse effect of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy depends on tumor size in patients with cervical cancer.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
- Risk factors and consequences of conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Article
- Human fibrin sealant reduces post-operative bile leakage of primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with choledocholithiasis.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is being increasingly used for management of common bile duct (CBD) stones. Primary CBD closure has been reported to have better short-term outcomes compared to T-tube placement. However, primary CBD closure cannot be performed in all patients.
aimThis study aims to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of LCBDE with primary CBD closure in appropriately selected patients and compare them with T-tube drainage.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients undergoing LCBDE in our department from June 2011 to October 2014 was performed. Primary closure was performed in 52 patients (group A), and a T-tube was placed in 33 patients (group B). Patient demographics, intraoperative findings, postoperative stay, complications, and long-term follow-up data were recorded and compared.
resultsThe mean operating time was much longer in group A compared to group B (113.92 vs. 95.92 min, p = 0.032). The overall complication rate (9.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.701) and hospital stay (4 vs. 5.11 days, p = 0.088) were similar in both groups. No patient required conversion to the open procedure. Bile leakage was more frequent in group A (5.78 vs. 0%, p = 0.279), but this was not statistically significant. All three patients with bile leakage were treated successfully by conservative measures and gradual drain withdrawal. On long-term follow-up, recurrent stones were detected in two patients in group A. No patient was found to develop CBD stricture.
conclusionLCBDE and primary CBD closure has excellent short- and long-term outcomes when performed in appropriately selected patients.
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.