ArticleCureus2021
Thirty-Day Unplanned Readmission After Ambulatory Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Western China: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A nomogram incorporating nutritional risk for predicting 31-day unplanned readmission in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus using LASSO regression.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- A German's Perspective on the Way toward Ambulatory Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Postoperative Questionnaire.Visceral medicine · 2025Article
- Comparative study of ambulatory versus inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Thailand: Assessing effectiveness and safety with a propensity score matched analysis.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2024Article
- Preoperative admission is non-essential in most patients receiving elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A cohort study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Efficacy of a new day surgery management mode based on WeChat: a study protocol for randomised controlled trials.BMJ open · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Day surgery has been gradually accepted by health professions globally, which can shorten the hospital stay and reduce medical costs. The ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been performed in China since over 10 years. However, few studies focus on its 30-day unplanned readmission rate of ambulatory LC and no standard of unplanned readmission rate for that now. Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the unplanned readmission rate and the reasons readmission after ambulatory LC in a tertiary hospital, which is the earliest ambulatory surgery implementation place in western China. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted. The patients who underwent ambulatory LC from September 2015 to September 2019 in West China Hospital were screened. The 30-day unplanned readmission rate was calculated as the first outcome. The reasons for unplanned readmission were analyzed and classified as the second outcome. Results The study included 3,014 patients, and the unplanned readmission rate was 1.53%. The rate of patients diagnosed with cholecystolithiasis with cholecystitis was significantly higher in the unplanned readmission group (73.9% vs. 48.9%, p=0.003), and medical cost of unplanned readmission patients was significantly more than that of non-readmission patients (8,102.4±1,375.7 Yuan vs. 7,574.61±10,14.0 Yuan; p=0.008). It was observed that 71.7% readmission happened in the first seven days. Wound problems (60.9%) and abdominal pain (26.1%) went the two main reasons for unplanned readmission. Conclusions The analysis revealed that the unplanned readmission rate of 1.53% was low for ambulatory LC. Some causes of unplanned readmission, such as abdominal pain and wound site pain, wound exudate could be reduced by some simple interventions of the clinical professions.
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.