Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35196149›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2022

How should we secure the cystic duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A UK-wide survey of clinical practice and systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis.

T Arkle, S Lam, G Toogood, B Kumar

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T ArkleNorwich Medical School, UK.
S LamNorwich Medical School, UK.
G ToogoodLeeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, UK.
B KumarNorwich Medical School, UK.
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIt is currently unknown which method of cystic duct closure is most effective at reducing the risk of bile leak after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aims of this work were to determine the most common closure methods used in the UK and review available evidence on which method has the lowest risk of bile leak.

methodsWe conducted an online survey through the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons (AUGIS). We also undertook a systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for studies that compared different methods for cystic duct occlusion and reported postoperative bile leak.

findingsThere was significant variation in practice between consultant surgeons. For routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy metal clips were used most (64%) followed by locking polymer clips (33%) and suture ties (3%). In cases of a dilated cystic duct, preferences were locking polymer clips (60%), suture ties (30%) and metal clips (5%). We included six studies in our review with a total of 8,011 patients. Metal clips were associated with an increased odds of bile leak compared with locking polymer clips (OR 5.66, 95% CI 1.13-28.41,

conclusionsLimited available evidence suggests that metal clips have the highest risk of bile leak, but results are not strong enough to recommend a change in current clinical practice. A trial is now required to determine the best method of cystic duct closure.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicCystic DuctHumansPolymersRetrospective StudiesUnited KingdomPolymersBileBile ductsBiliary tract diseasesCholecystectomyLaparoscopicPostoperative period

Identifiers

PMID35196149
PMCPMC9685994
OpenAlexW3208704240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.