ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy as a reliable rescue procedure for complicated bile duct stones.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biliary Drainage for the Preoperative Management of Periampullary Neoplasms: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Surgical Treatment for Choledocholithiasis Following Repeated Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic choledochotomy and choledochoduodenostomy for the management of persistent common bile duct stones.SAGE open medical case reports · 2022Article
- An alternative palliative surgical method for advanced malignant obstructive jaundice: Laparoscopic bridge choledochoduodenostomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stone extraction is generally accepted as first line management for common bile duct (CBD) stones. CBD exploration, either by open or laparoscopic approach nowadays, is usually reserved for ERCP failures, complicated stone locations, along with altered anatomical situations. The aim of this study was to highlight the increasing role of laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy which is not only a reliable but also as a rescue procedure for those failed ERCP cases due to complicated bile duct stones. MATERIALS AND
methodsIt is a retrospective review of the database, from a tertiary care teaching institution from India, from Jan 2012 up to December 2016.
resultsOut of total 30 patients who underwent laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy, 28 had failed ERC stone clearance while two patients were directly offered drainage in view of unfavorable anatomy. The major reasons for failed ERC stone clearance were as follows-multiple large calculi (42.8%), recurrent stones (21.4%), and associated stricture (21.4%). Mean operating time was 130 (± 27) minutes with mean blood loss of 60 (± 19) ml. Stone extraction was successful, primarily by milking in 13 (43.33%) patients, rest required augmentation by Dormia basket/balloon. Two patients (6.66%) developed controlled bile leak which resolved with conservative treatment. The median length of hospital stay was 5 days (IQR 3-9). Mean duration of follow-up was 17 (± 3.2) months.
conclusionLaparoscopic common bile duct exploration with choledochoduodenostomy has been shown to be a safe, reliable, and efficient method for treating complex CBDS, especially after failed ERCP procedures.
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.