ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with previous upper midline abdominal surgery: comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy after gastric surgery and non-gastric surgery using propensity score matching.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of previous abdominal surgery and the utilisation of modified access techniques on the operative difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Article
- Does previous gastrectomy history affect the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy?BMC surgery · 2023Review
- Relationship between Degree of Dependency and Hospitalization Time of Surgical Patients.Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious upper midline abdominal surgery is a reported relative contraindication to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We aimed to investigate the effects of previous upper abdominal surgery on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy; we evaluated the effects of the previous upper abdominal surgery type on laparoscopic cholecystectomy with respect to complications and conversion to open surgery.
methodsWe prospectively evaluated 1,258 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, including those who underwent upper midline abdominal surgery previously, at a single tertiary referral center. The perioperative and postoperative outcomes-open conversion rate, operation time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay-were evaluated. Patients were grouped according to the previous surgical method into the gastric (n = 77), non-gastric (n = 40), and control (n = 1141) groups. Patients in the gastric + non-gastric groups (n = 117) were 1:1 matched with those in the control group (n = 117) using propensity score matching (PSM).
resultsBefore PSM, age, sex, open conversion rate, gallbladder status, port number, overall morbidity, and postoperative hospital stay duration did not significantly differ between the gastric and non-gastric groups; the body mass index (22.3 ± 3.4 versus 24.1 ± 3.8 kg/m
conclusionPrevious upper midline abdominal surgery was not contraindicative to safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients with previous upper midline abdominal surgery undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be informed preoperatively of the probability of conversion to open surgery, lengthened duration, and associated morbidities.
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.