ArticleBMC gastroenterology2019
A retrospective clinical and microbial analysis of 32 patients with bilomas.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Delayed Presentation of a Postoperative Biloma Requiring Multimodal Intervention in an Elderly Female: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Evaluation of exclusive internal endoscopic drainage for complex biloma with transluminal and transpapillary stenting.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Relationships of hepatic histopathological findings and bile microbiological aspects with bile duct injury repair surgical outcomes: A historical cohort.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2022Article
- Spontaneous Biloma Secondary to Choledocholithiasis.ACG case reports journal · 2021Article
- The Prevalence and Clinical Significance of Anaerobic Bacteria in Major Liver Resection.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Case of Candidal Infection of Large Biloma After CT-Guided Liver Biopsy Confirming Autoimmune Hepatitis.Cureus · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBilomas are defined collections of bile fluids mainly caused by iatrogenic injuries of the bile duct system. Owing to the infrequency of this disease, studies addressing bilomas are rare.
methodsBy using an endoscopic database, this retrospective study identified 32 patients with bilomas treated between 2004 to 2015, in order to analyse aetiology, clinical presentation, spectrum of pathogens, and resolution rate of bilomas.
results65.6% of the study population (21/32) developed bilomas after surgery and 21.9% (7/32) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). Icterus, fever, and abdominal pain were the leading symptoms. 93.9% (46/49) of microbiological bile cultures revealed a positive microbiology. The predominant microorganisms were the group of Enterobacteriaceae (43.0%, 52/121), followed by Enterococcus spp. (32.2%, 39/121), and Candida spp. (9.1%, 11/121). Multiresistant bacteria like Enterobacteriaceae were isolated from one quarter of all patients. Single or multimodal treatment resulted in an overall complication rate of 4.8% (9/188). Clinical follow-up analysis showed a complete resolution rate of 78.3% for interventional therapy and 80% in the non-interventional group.
conclusionsPathogen spectrum of bilomas mainly comprises the group of Enterobacteriacae and Enterococcus spp., with a high proportion of multiresistant bacteria. Different interventional approaches are available for biloma drainage, which seem to be safe and effective for most patients.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015208 , retrospectively registered.
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.