ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Short term outcomes of three dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Retrospective evaluation of transhepatic biliary stent placement in patients undergoing hepaticojejunostomy.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Application of a self-made liver suspension device in 3D laparoscopic non-anatomical resection of liver segment VI and VII tumors.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Two- and three-dimensional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparative study of a single-center experience.Korean journal of transplantation · 2022Article
- Outcomes of initial 100 cases of laparoscopic nephrectomy at tertiary care center (PKLI).Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the short-term outcomes of three dimensional (3D) versus two dimensional (2D) laparoscopic procedures used for cholecystectomy.
methodsThis study was conducted at minimally invasive surgery center of Liaquat University of Medical Health and Sciences (LUMHS) Jamshoro Pakistan, between 15
resultsA total of one hundred forty patients were included in the study. Group-A consists of sixty two females and eleven males whereas Group-B comprised of fifty eight females and fifteen males. Eight percent of patients in Group-A whereas in Group-B two percent had gallbladder rupture. Fifteen percent of patients in Group-A whereas 5.4% from Group-B had bleeding from liver bed. One patient from Group-A had CBD (Common Bile Duct) injury. Post-operatively two (2.73%) patients from Group-A had port site bleeding. Six (8.21%) patients had port site infection in Group-A.
conclusionThree dimensional was found to have low incidence of intra-operative and post-operative complications compared to 2D laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
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.