ArticleSurgery research and practice2017
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Elderly: An Experience at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Western Nepal.
Article in Surgery research and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Prevalence and predictors of postcholecystectomy syndrome in Nepalese patients after 1 week of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Prediction of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An observational study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- Safe and feasible outcomes of cholecystectomy in extremely elderly patients (octogenarians vs. nonagenarians).Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe incidence of gallstone increases with increasing age. No studies have been reported in the elderly population with laparoscopic cholecystectomy from developing nations. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy between the elderly (≥60 years old) and the young (<60 years old).
methodsFrom July 2015 to June 2016, a retrospective review of medical records of 78 elderly patients (≥60 years old) and 164 young patients (<60 years old) who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy was done. The patients' demographics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed.
resultsMedian ages were 65 years (range: 60-80) and 45 years (range: 21-59) for the elderly group and the young group. The majority of patients were female (62.8 and 72%). There were no significant differences in the conversion rate (9 and 7.9%,
conclusionOur results of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients are comparable with those in young patients. Therefore, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe even in the elderly population.
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.