ArticleFuture science OA2020
Comparison of postoperative liver function between different dissection techniques during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Future science OA, 2020. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of thiol-disulfide homeostasis under low and standard pneumoperitoneum in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective comparative study.European journal of medical research · 2025Trial
- Transient liver enzyme elevations following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comprehensive review.Updates in surgery · 2025Review
- Article
- Transient Elevation of Liver Function Tests and Bilirubin Levels After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Comparison of postoperative outcomes between different dissection techniques during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in rabbits: randomized study.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2024Article
- Comparative evaluation of three laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques in rabbit's model.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Article
- The Effect of L-Hook Dissection and Scissors Dissection on Liver Injury in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies.Cureus · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimIn this study, we investigated and compared the effect of different types of dissector (Maryland vs Hook) on changes in liver function tests (LFTs) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. PATIENTS &
methodsThe enrolled patients were divided into two groups. Group A patients underwent dissection by Maryland dissecting forceps, group B by Hook dissecting instrument. LFTs were measured preoperatively and at 1 day and 1 week, postoperatively.
resultsFor both Maryland and Hook dissection, the 1-day postoperative values for total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were significantly higher than the preoperative values. Also, there were no statistical differences between Hook and Maryland.
conclusionThe elevation of LFTs seems to be attributed to other factors.
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.