Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33528666›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Open conversion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration: subspecialisation safely reduces the conversion rates.

Ahmad H M Nassar, Hisham El Zanati, Hwei J Ng, Khurram S Khan, Colin Wood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Laparoscopic Subtotal Cholecystectomy for Difficult Gallbladders: Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Ahmad H M NassarDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, Lanarkshire, UK. ahmad.nassar@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7878-7024
Hisham El ZanatiDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Hairmyres, East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, UK.
Hwei J NgDepartment of Surgery, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
Khurram S KhanDepartment of Surgery, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
Colin WoodDepartment of Surgery, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpen conversion rates during laparoscopic cholecystectomy vary depending on many factors. Surgeon experience and operative difficulty influence the decision to convert on the grounds of patient safety but occasionally due to technical factors. We aim to evaluate the difficulties leading to conversion, the strategies used to minimise this event and how subspecialisation influenced conversion rates over time.

methodsProspectively collected data from 5738 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by a single surgeon over 28 years was analysed. Routine intraoperative cholangiography and common bile duct exploration when indicated are utilised. Patients undergoing conversion, fundus first dissection or subtotal cholecystectomy were identified and the causes and outcomes compared to those in the literature.

results28 patients underwent conversion to open cholecystectomy (0.49%). Morbidity was relatively high (33%). 16 of the 28 patients (57%) had undergone bile duct exploration. The most common causes of conversion in our series were dense adhesions (9/28, 32%) and impacted bile duct stones (7/28, 25%). 173 patients underwent fundus first cholecystectomy (FFC) (3%) and 6 subtotal cholecystectomy (0.1%). Morbidity was 17.3% for the FFC and no complications were encountered in the subtotal cholecystectomy patients. These salvage techniques have reduced our conversion rate from a potential 3.5% to 0.49%.

conclusionAlthough open conversion should not be seen as a failure, it carries a high morbidity and should only be performed when other strategies have failed. Subspecialisation and a high emergency case volume together with FFC and subtotal cholecystectomy as salvage strategies can reduce conversion and its morbidity in difficult cholecystectomies.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicBile DuctsCholangiographyCholecystectomyHumansConversionDifficult cholecystectomyFundus first cholecystectomyLaparoscopic cholecystectomyNassar scaleSubtotal cholecystectomy

Identifiers

PMID33528666
PMCPMC8741693

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.