ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Timing is everything: outcomes of 30,259 delayed cholecystectomies in New York State.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Racial disparities in the rate of same-admission cholecystectomy following biliary pancreatitis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Association between timing of operative interventions and mortality in emergency general surgery.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2024Article
- Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis following the Tokyo Guidelines 2018: a prospective single-center study of 201 consecutive cases.Surgical endoscopy · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe timing of cholecystectomy in relation to outcomes has been debated. To our knowledge, there are no large population-based studies looking at outcomes and complications of delayed cholecystectomy [DC] (> 72 h after presentation). This study utilizes a statewide database to determine whether there are differences in patient outcomes for DC performed at 3-4 days, 5-6 days, and ≥ 7 days after presentation.
methodsThe New York SPARCS database was used to identify adult patients presenting with a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis from 2005 to 2017. Patients aged < 18, those with missing identifier or procedure-date information, those who underwent early cholecystectomy < 72 h or upon readmission, were excluded. Patients undergoing DC at 3-4 days, 5-6 days, and ≥ 7 days were compared in terms of overall complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions/emergency department (ED) visits, and 30-day mortality.
results30,259 patients were identified. DCs were performed within 3-4 days (n = 19,845, 65.6%), 5-6 days (n = 6432, 21.3%), and ≥ 7 days (n = 3982, 13.2%). There was a stepwise deterioration in outcomes with increased delay to surgery (Fig. 1). When comparing 3-4 and ≥ 7 days, overall complications (OR = 0.418, 95% CI: 0.387-0.452), 30-day readmissions (OR = 0.609, 95% CI: 0.549-0.674), 30-day ED visits (OR = 0.697, 95% CI: 0.637-0.763), 30-day mortality (OR = 0.601, 95% CI: 0.400-0.904), and LOS (OR = 0.729, 95% CI: 0.710-0.748) were lower in the 3-4 day cohort.
conclusionsDC within 3-4 days is associated with fewer complications, readmissions and ED visits, and reduced LOS compared to DC at 5-6 or ≥ 7 days after presentation. In addition, 30-day mortality was also significantly different comparing 3-4 with ≥ 7-day cohorts. These data are important for guiding patients in the consent process and may point to choosing an earlier interval cholecystectomy for high-risk patients.
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.