ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Morbidity following emergency and elective cholecystectomy: a retrospective comparative cohort study.
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 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.
- Intraoperative biliary anatomy visualization using indocyanine green fluorescence micro-dosing: a quantitative preclinical study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Emergency cholecystectomy: risk factors and impact of delay on electively booked patients, a 5-year experience of a tertiary care center.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients older than 80 years: two-years follow-up.BMC surgery · 2024Observational
- Post Cholecystectomy Bile Duct Injury in an Acute Setting: Categorization, Triaging, and Management Algorithm.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Safety profile and outcomes of intraoperative ultrasound-guided remnant cholecystectomy.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy (EMLC) is commonly performed for all biliary pathology, yet EMLC can be challenging due to acute inflammation. Understanding the risks of EMLC is necessary before patients can make an informed decision regarding operative management. The aim of the present study was to compare rates of operative and post-operative outcomes between EMLC and elective LC (ELLC) using a large contemporary cohort, to inform the consent process and influence surgical decision making.
methodsAll patients who underwent EMLC and ELLC in one UK health board between January 2015 and December 2019 were considered for inclusion. Data were collected retrospectively from multiple regional databases using a deterministic records-linkage methodology. Patients were followed up for 100 days post-operatively for adverse outcomes and outcomes were compared between groups using both univariate and multivariate analysis adjusting for pre-operative factors.
resultsA total of 2768 LCs were performed [age (range), 52(13-92); M:F, 1:2.7]. In both the univariate and multivariate analysis, EMLC was positively associated with subtotal cholecystectomy (RR 2.0; p < 0.001), post-operative complication (RR 2.8; p < 0.001), post-operative imaging (RR 2.0; p < 0.001), post-operative intervention (RR 2.3; p < 0.001), prolonged post-operative hospitalisation (RR 3.8; p < 0.001) and readmission (RR 2.2; p < 0.001). EMLC had higher rates of post-operative mortality in univariate analysis (RR 10.8; p = 0.01). DISCUSSION: EMLC is positively associated with adverse outcomes versus ELLC. Of course this study does not focus on a specific biliary pathology; nevertheless, it illustrates the additional risk associated with EMLC. This should be clearly outlined during the consent process but should be balanced with the risk of further biliary attacks. Further studies are required to identify particular patient groups who benefit from elective surgery.
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.