Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28409369›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017

Laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis concomitant with calculus of the left intrahepatic duct or abdominal adhesions.

Yueqi Wang, Xiaobo Bo, Yaojie Wang, Min Li, Sheng Shen, Tao Suo, Hongtao Pan, Han Liu, Houbao Liu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yueqi WangDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Xiaobo BoDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Yaojie WangDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Min LiDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Sheng ShenDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Tao SuoDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Hongtao PanDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Han LiuDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China.
Houbao LiuDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, China. houbaoliu@aliyun.com.
Fudan University · CNZhongshan Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely promoted in recent years as a safe and effective treatment for choledocholithiasis. However, there are no standard guidelines for the treatment of patients who have concomitant hepatolithiasis of the left liver and abdominal adhesions. The aim of the current research was to compare the outcomes of open versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with left hepatectomy (OCBDH vs. LCBDH) in patients with choledocholithiasis concomitant with left-sided hepatolithiasis, and to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis in patients with abdominal adhesions.

methodsBetween October 2012 and October 2015, a total of 321 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis underwent surgical treatment. LCBDE was performed in 107 patients, and open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) was performed in 111 patients. Further, 31 patients and 72 patients underwent LCBDH and OCBDH, respectively. A total of 133 patients who underwent LCBDE or OCBDE had abdominal adhesions, which were classified as mild, moderate, or severe according to an abdominal adhesion scoring system, which was validated in the LCBDE group and OCBDE group. The perioperative results were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively.

resultsIn the mild adhesion group, blood loss, postoperative recovery in the LCBDE group was lesser than those in the OCBDE group. In the moderate adhesion group, the postoperative recovery was significantly shorter in the LCBDE group than in the OCBDE group. In the severe adhesion group, the operation time and blood loss in the LCBDE group were higher than those in the OCBDE group. The postoperative recovery was significantly better in the LCBDH group than in the OCBDH group.

conclusionLCBDH can obviously improve recovery and shorten the hospitalization period. Further, LCBDE is safe and feasible for patients of choledocholithiasis with mild and moderate abdominal adhesions.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiliary Tract Surgical ProceduresCholedocholithiasisCommon Bile DuctFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTissue AdhesionsTreatment OutcomeAbdominal adhesionsCholedocholithiasisHepatectomyHepatolithiasisLaparoscopic

Identifiers

PMID28409369
OpenAlexW2606627311

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.