Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35313430›Full record

ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery

Patient selection for ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review.

Weiwei Chen, Qiang Wu, Ning Fu, Zhiming Yang, Jingcheng Hao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
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.

Weiwei ChenDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Xindu, Chengdu, China.
Qiang WuDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Xindu, Chengdu, China.
Ning FuDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Xindu, Chengdu, China.
Zhiming YangDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Xindu, Chengdu, China.
Jingcheng HaoDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Xindu, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Currently, there is no consensus on patient selection for ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study is a systematic review of previously published patient selection for ambulatory LC. Methods: A comprehensive search was done in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Google Scholar Database up to March 2020 to summarise previously reported medical or surgical selection criteria used for inclusion and exclusion of patients, as well as successful same-day discharge rates and readmission rate after discharge. Results: Fifty-nine studies with a total of 13,219 patients were included in this systematic review. In total, the median same-day discharge rate was 90% (range: 63%-99.4%), and median readmission rate was 2.22% (range: 0%-16.9%). The most considered medical criteria were American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I and II, age <70, and body mass index <35. Surgical criteria varied greatly. The top three accessible exclusion variables were (1) common bile duct stones, cholangitis, or jaundice (27 publications, 45.8%); (2) history of abdominal surgery (12 publications, 20.3%) and (3) history of pancreatitis (9 publications, 15.3%). Conclusion: The results of the current study showed the variable patient selection in different centres, the medical aspect criteria may be expanded under adequate pre-anaesthetic assessment and preparation and the surgical aspect criteria should include more laboratory or imaging parameters to ensure the surgical safety.

Indexed as

Ambulatory surgical procedureslaparoscopic cholecystectomysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35313430
PMCPMC8973487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.