Observational studyScientific reports2020
Retrospective comparative analysis of choledochoscopic bile duct exploration versus ERCP for bile duct stones.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Prolonged Biliary Plastic Stent Dwell Time in Patients with Choledocholithiasis Undergoing ERCP Followed by Cholecystectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Effect of high-quality nursing care on postoperative complications and quality of life for patients undergoing common bile duct exploration.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Initial experience with ultrafine choledochoscopy combined with low-dose atropine for the treatment of Oddi intersphincter stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of primary suture following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the treatment of elderly patients with cholecystolithiasis complicated by choledocholithiasis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is an effective, safe, and less-costly method of treating choledocholithiasis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Comparison of the clinical effects of dual-modality endoscopy and traditional laparotomy for the treatment of intra- and extrahepatic bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor in patients with gallstones.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Epidemiology and outcomes of choledocholithiasis and cholangitis in the United States: trends and urban-rural variations.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Comparing One-Stage vs Two-Stage Approaches for the Management of Choledocholithiasis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Review
- Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
- Win or lose, nighttime transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a win.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2023Article
- Predictors for stone recurrence after a successful common bile duct surgical exploration for choledocholithiasis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Advances in Risk Factors for Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Debate still exists for the management of choledocholithiasis. The purpose of this study is to quantify the rate of recurrent choledocholithiasis post choledochoscopic bile duct exploration (CBDE) in comparison to ERCP and sphincterotomy, and to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach in a busy metropolitan hospital. Data of patients undergoing CBDE from 2009-2014 at the Northern Hospital, Victoria, Australia, was collected retrospectively. Primary outcomes were bile duct clearance rate and rate of recurrent stones post-clearance. Secondary outcomes measured were post-operative complications, laparoscopic to open conversion rate and operative time. Data of patients undergoing ERCP at the same institution was collected and compared. In total, there were 4,091 cholecystectomy cases performed from 2009-2014, of which 260 (6.3%) of patients had an intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) indicating a common bile duct (CBD) stone. Two hundred and forty-eight patients (95.3%) had a CBDE. The remaining 12 patients (4.6%) had radiological clearance, which were excluded from the study. The overall clearance rate for patients undergoing CBDE was 84% (209/248). The risk of recurrent stones up to 8 years post clearance was 2% (4/209). In the same institution, and between 1998-2012, a total of 1,148 patients underwent ERCP, of which 571 had endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). Forty-three patients required a repeat ERCP for recurrent CBD stones with a complication rate of 7.5%. Time to recurrence ranged from 6 months to 10 years with a mean of 4.5 years. The rate of recurrence was lower in the CBDE group compared to the patients who had an ERCP (8.9% vs. 2%). CBDE is a feasible and effective method for clearance of CBD stones at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This approach, although not widely used, reduces the need for ERCP, which has inherent complications. In the longer term, this series showed a significant reduction in the rate of CBD stone recurrence.
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.