Trial reportLancet (London, England)2019
Restrictive strategy versus usual care for cholecystectomy in patients with gallstones and abdominal pain (SECURE): a multicentre, randomised, parallel-arm, non-inferiority trial.
Trial report in Lancet (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06002516 (The RELIEF-pathway in Patients With Upper Abdominal Pain; an Open-label Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
The RELIEF-pathway in Patients With Upper Abdominal Pain; an Open-label Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of symptomatic cholelithiasis: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Effectiveness of conservative management versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the prevention of recurrent symptoms and complications in adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease (C-GALL trial): pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Trial
- Effects of Individualized Nursing Based on Zero-Defect Theory on Perioperative Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Disease markers · 2022Trial
- Veillonella, Neisseria, Prevotella, and Lachnoanaerobaculum enrichment in salivary microbiome predicts gallstone disease.European journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Gallbladder-preserving cholelithotomy in selected patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis: A case series.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Review
- Clinical perspectives on post-cholecystectomy syndrome: a narrative review.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of acute pancreatitis on the outcomes of cholecystectomy. An observational multicenter retrospective study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Observational
- Postoperative care for patients undergoing cholecystectomy: A comprehensive nursing review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Follow-up study of gallbladder stones in 44 children.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Extravertebral low back pain: a scoping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Article
- "One-day, one-stay, and one-step" lessons from the Danish guidelines for the treatment of gallstone disease.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2023Article
- Patients with Clinically Suspected Gallstone Disease: A More Selective Ultrasound May Improve Treatment Related Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The Symptomatic Outcomes of Cholecystectomy for Gallstones.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Quality of Information in Gallstone Disease Videos on TikTok: Cross-sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Gallstones: The thing in itself.Clinical liver disease · 2022Review
- Tailoring diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic gallstone disease.The British journal of surgery · 2022Review
- Healthcare utilisation of patients with cholecystolithiasis in primary care: a multipractice comparative analysis.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a shared decision-making strategy with online decision aids in surgical and orthopaedic practice: study protocol for the E-valuAID, a multicentre study with a stepped-wedge design.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
20 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInternational guidelines advise laparoscopic cholecystectomy to treat symptomatic, uncomplicated gallstones. Usual care regarding cholecystectomy is associated with practice variation and persistent post-cholecystectomy pain in 10-41% of patients. We aimed to compare the non-inferiority of a restrictive strategy with stepwise selection with usual care to assess (in)efficient use of cholecystectomy.
methodsWe did a multicentre, randomised, parallel-arm, non-inferiority study in 24 academic and non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. We enrolled patients aged 18-95 years with abdominal pain and ultrasound-proven gallstones or sludge. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either usual care in which selection for cholecystectomy was left to the discretion of the surgeon, or a restrictive strategy with stepwise selection for cholecystectomy. For the restrictive strategy, cholecystectomy was advised for patients who fulfilled all five pre-specified criteria of the triage instrument: 1) severe pain attacks, 2) pain lasting 15-30 min or longer, 3) pain located in epigastrium or right upper quadrant, 4) pain radiating to the back, and 5) a positive pain response to simple analgesics. Randomisation was done with an online program, implemented into a web-based application using blocks of variable sizes, and stratified for centre (academic versus non-academic and a high vs low number of patients), sex, and body-mass index. Physicians and patients were masked for study-arm allocation until after completion of the triage instrument. The primary, non-inferiority, patient-reported endpoint was the proportion of patients who were pain-free at 12 months' follow-up, analysed by intention to treat and per protocol. A 5% non-inferiority margin was chosen, based on the estimated clinically relevant difference. Safety analyses were also done in the intention-to treat population. This trial is registered at the Netherlands National Trial Register, number NTR4022.
findingsBetween Feb 5, 2014, and April 25, 2017, we included 1067 patients for analysis: 537 assigned to usual care and 530 to the restrictive strategy. At 12 months' follow-up 298 patients (56%; 95% CI, 52·0-60·4) were pain-free in the restrictive strategy group, compared with 321 patients (60%, 55·6-63·8) in usual care. Non-inferiority was not shown (difference 3·6%; one-sided 95% lower CI -8·6%; p
interpretationSuboptimal pain reduction in patients with gallstones and abdominal pain was noted with both usual care and following a restrictive strategy for selection for cholecystectomy. However, the restrictive strategy was associated with fewer cholecystectomies. The findings should encourage physicians involved in the care of patients with gallstones to rethink cholecystectomy, and to be more careful in advising a surgical approach in patients with gallstones and abdominal symptoms.
fundingThe Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and CZ healthcare insurance.
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.