ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022
Predictors for stone recurrence after a successful common bile duct surgical exploration for choledocholithiasis.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. 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.
- Recurrent choledocholithiasis after laparoscopic bile duct exploration: incidence, risk factors, and management strategies.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Structural or functional abnormality of sphincter of Oddi: an important factor for the recurrence of choledocholithiasis after endoscopic treatment.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Treatment for recurrent choledocholithiasis: endoscopic? or laparoscopic? A prospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Factors influencing recurrence and model development for recurrence of minimally invasive percutaneous transhepatic lithotripsy: a single-center retrospective study.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
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
backgroundRecurrence after common bile duct stone (CBDS) clearance is the major long-term drawback of their management. Its prevalence is significant, and it occurs after all primary therapeutic alternatives. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive factors associated with stone recurrence after surgical common bile duct exploration (CBDE).
methodsA retrospective cohort study based on patients undergoing CBDE between 2000 and 2018 was conducted. Uni- and multivariate hierarchical regression analyses were performed to assess the independent predictive factors associated with recurrent CBDS in patients with initially successful surgery.
resultsA total of 365 patients underwent successful surgical procedures. After a median follow-up of 43.2 (IQR 84) months, 31 (8.4%) patients were diagnosed with CBD stone recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 30.3 (IQR 38) months. The only variable associated with CBDS recurrence was preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (HR 2.436, 95% CI: 1.031-5.751, P = 0.042)).
conclusionPatients who undergo preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy and then cholecystectomy with successful common bile duct clearance may be at increased risk for recurrent stone disease compared to those who go straight to surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35670858What 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.