ArticleMedicine2018
Biliary tract exploration through a common bile duct incision or left hepatic duct stump in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy for left side hepatolithiasis: which is better?: A single-center retrospective case-control study.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Severe Persistent Hyponatremia: A Rare Presentation of Biliary Fluid Loss.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) followed by biliary tract exploration is used to treat left-sided hepatolithiasis (LSH). The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of 2 methods of biliary tract exploration in LLH:biliary tract exploration through a common bile duct (CBD) incision (with T-tube drainage) or through the left hepatic duct (LHD) stump (without T-tube drainage).LSH patients (113 patients) were recruited retrospectively in our hospital from December 2008 to January 2016. To compare different methods of biliary tract exploration during LLH, the patients were divided into 2 groups: 41 patients underwent biliary tract exploration through the LHD stump (LHD group), and 72 patients underwent biliary tract exploration through a CBD incision (CBD group). Baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgery-related complications, postoperative hospital stay (PHS) and long-term results were compared between the 2 groups.There was no unplanned reoperation in the 2 groups. One patient in the CBD group had a residual stone, which was removed by choledochoscopy 2 months postoperation. Two patients in the LHD group and 3 patients in the CBD group had bile leakage and were cured with abdominal drainage. There were no significant differences in the total operation time, incidence of residual stones and bile leakage between the 2 groups (P > .05). The PHS and the incidence of hypokalemia or hyponatremia in the LHD group were significantly lower than those in the CBD group (P < .05). T-tube-related complications occurred in 13.9% (10/72) of the CBD patients. The mean follow-up period was 37.2 ± 13.8 months. There were no significant differences in the incidence of recurrence stones or cholangitis (P > .05) between the 2 groups.Exploration of the biliary tract through the LHD stump without T-tube drainage is safe with satisfactory short- and long-term results for selected LSH 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.