ArticleScientific reports2020
Emergent cholecystectomy in patients on antithrombotic therapy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of anti-thrombotic therapy on bleeding outcomes and thrombosis following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Early Postoperative Outcomes in Acute Calculous vs. Acute Acalculous Cholecystitis: A Retrospective Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Emergency cholecystectomy: risk factors and impact of delay on electively booked patients, a 5-year experience of a tertiary care center.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Improving early cholecystectomy rate in acute cholecystitis with an evidence-based local multidisciplinary protocol and a surgical audit: single-center experience through an Acute Care Surgery Division.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Management of acute cholecystitis in patients on anti-thrombotic therapy: A single center experience.Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Article
- Surgeons have hesitated early cholecystectomy because of cardiovascular comorbidities during adoption of guidelines.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Safety of cholecystectomy in patients under antithrombotic Drugs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) recommend emergent cholecystectomy (EC) for acute cholecystitis. However, the number of patients on antithrombotic therapy (AT) has increased significantly, and no evidence has yet suggested that EC should be performed for acute cholecystitis in such patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether EC is as safe for patients on AT as for patients not on AT. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent EC from 2007 to 2018 at a single center. First, patients were divided into two groups according to the use of antithrombotic agents: AT; and no-AT. Second, the AT group was divided into three sub-groups according to the use of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), or anticoagulant with or without antiplatelet therapy (AC ± APT). We then evaluated outcomes of EC among all four groups. The primary outcome was 30- and 90- day mortality rate, and secondary outcomes were morbidity rate and surgical outcomes. A total of 478 patients were enrolled (AT, n = 123, no-AT, n = 355) patients. No differences in morbidity rate (6.5% vs. 3.7%, respectively; P = 0.203), 30-day mortality rate (1.6% vs. 1.4%, respectively; P = 1.0) or 90-day mortality rate (1.6% vs. 1.4%, respectively; P = 1.0) were evident between AT and no-AT groups. Between the no-AT and AC ± APT groups, a significant difference was seen in blood loss (10 mL vs. 114 mL, respectively; P = 0.017). Among the three AT sub-groups and the no-AT group, no differences were evident in morbidity rate (3.7% vs. 8.9% vs. 0% vs. 6.5%, respectively; P = 0.201) or 30-day mortality (1.4% vs. 0% vs. 0% vs. 4.3%, respectively; P = 0.351). No hemorrhagic or thrombotic morbidities were identified after EC in any group. In conclusion, EC for acute cholecystitis is as safe for patients on AT as for patients not on AT.
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.