Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32780231›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

The critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Strasberg Yes or No? An Italian Multicentre study.

Lucia Ilaria Sgaramella, Angela Gurrado, Alessandro Pasculli, Nicola de Angelis, Riccardo Memeo, Francesco Paolo Prete, Stefano Berti, Graziano Ceccarelli, Marco Rigamonti, Francesco Giuseppe Aldo Badessi and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Lucia Ilaria SgaramellaUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. ilaria.sgaram@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6087-4119
Angela GurradoUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Alessandro PasculliUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Nicola de AngelisDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Henri Mondor Hospital, Université Paris-Est (UEP), Créteil, France.
Riccardo MemeoDepartment of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University "Aldo Moro" of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Francesco Paolo PreteUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Stefano BertiDepartment of General Surgery, "Sant'Andrea" Hospital La Spezia, La Spezia, Italy.
Graziano CeccarelliDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, San Donato Hospital, via Pietro Nenni 20-22, 52100, Arezzo, Italy.
Marco RigamontiDepartment of General Surgery, Cles Hospital, Cles, Italy.
Francesco Giuseppe Aldo BadessiDepartment of General Surgery, "Clinica Sant'Elena" - Quartu Sant'Elena, Quartu Sant'Elena, Italy.
Nicola SolariDepartment of Surgery, IRCSS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Marco MiloneDepartment of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II" University, Napoli, Italy.
Fausto CatenaDepartment of Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Parma University Hospital, Parma, Italy.
Stefano ScabiniDepartment of Surgery, IRCSS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Francesco VittoreUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Gennaro PerroneDepartment of Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Parma University Hospital, Parma, Italy.
Carlo de WerraDepartment of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II" University, Napoli, Italy.
Ferdinando CafieroDepartment of Surgery, IRCSS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Mario TestiniUnit of General Surgery "V. Bonomo", Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
SYoN Italian Collaborative Group
Collaborative Group (United States) · USUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · ITFederico II University Hospital · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITUniversity of Parma · ITAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FROspedale San Donato · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered the gold standard for the treatment of gallbladder lithiasis; nevertheless, the incidence of bile duct injuries (BDI) is still high (0.3-0.8%) compared to open cholecystectomy (0.2%). In 1995, Strasberg introduced the "Critical View of Safety" (CVS) to reduce the risk of BDI. Despite its widespread use, the scientific evidence supporting this technique to prevent BDI is controversial.

methodsBetween March 2017 and March 2019, the data of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 30 Italian surgical departments were collected on a national database. A survey was submitted to all members of Italian Digestive Pathology Society to obtain data on the preoperative workup, the surgical and postoperative management of patients and to judge, at the end of the procedure, if the isolation of the elements was performed according to the CVS. In the case of a declared critical view, iconographic documentation was obtained, finally reviewed by an external auditor.

resultsData from 604 patients were analysed. The study population was divided into two groups according to the evidence (Group A; n = 11) or absence (Group B; N = 593) of BDI and perioperative bleeding. The non-use of CVS was found in 54.6% of procedures in the Group A, and 25.8% in the Group B, and evaluating the operator-related variables the execution of CVS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of BDI and intraoperative bleeding.

conclusionsThe CVS confirmed to be the safest technique to recognize the elements of the Calot triangle and, if correctly performed, it significantly impacted on preventing intraoperative complications. Additional educational programs on the correct application of CVS in clinical practice would be desirable to avoid extreme conditions that may require additional procedures.

Indexed as

Bile Duct DiseasesCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicBile DuctsGallbladderHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsItalyBile duct injuriesCholecystectomyCritical view of safetyIntraoperative bleedingLaparoscopic trainingLaparoscopy

Identifiers

PMID32780231
PMCPMC8195809
OpenAlexW3048935936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.