SynthesisMedicine2018
Ursodeoxycholic acid after common bile duct stones removal for prevention of recurrence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Advancements in Managing Choledocholithiasis and Acute Cholangitis in the Elderly: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Characterization of biliary and duodenal microbiota in patients with primary and recurrent choledocholithiasis.Health information science and systems · 2024Article
- Risk factors for recurrence of common bile duct stones after surgical treatment and effect of ursodeoxycholic acid intervention.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- A clinician's guide to gallstones and common bile duct (CBD): A study protocol for a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Rodent models of cholestatic liver disease: A practical guide for translational research.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2021Review
- Advances in Risk Factors for Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe recurrence rate of common bile duct stones (CBDS) after removal has been reported to exceed 10% and no established pharmacologic treatment exists for the prevention of recurrent CBDS. Many studies indicated ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has the potential to prevent the recurrence of CBDS. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effects of UDCA for prevention of recurrence after common bile duct stones removal. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically screen all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through electronically and hand searching. The following search engines including Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Proquest, Scopus, Web of Science, Pubmed, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Information, Wanfang Data. Supplementary sources will be searched including gray literature, conference proceedings, and potential identified publications in OpenGrey.eu and Google Scholar databases. Two reviewers will independently conduct the trial inclusion, data extraction and assess the quality of studies. The recurrence rate of CBDS will be assessed as the primary outcomes. The adverse event that required discontinuation of UDCA intervention and the drop-outs (lost to follow-up) before the end of the study will be measured as secondary outcomes. Methodological quality will be evaluated according to the Cochrane risk of bias. All analyses will be applied by RevMan (version 5.3).
resultsThis systemic review and meta-analysis will evaluate the effects of UDCA for prevention of recurrence after CBDS removal in RCTs.
conclusionOur study will provide evidence to judge whether UDCA is an effective intervention to prevent the recurrence after CBDS removal.
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.