ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2023
The role of cholecystectomy following endoscopic sphincterotomy and bile duct stone removal.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delayed Cholecystectomy After ERCP in Geriatric Patients: Balancing Surgical Risk and Recurrence Prevention - A Retrospective Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Review
- 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCholedocholithiasis is common, with patients usually treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and subsequent cholecystectomy to remove the presumed source of common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, previous investigations into the management of patients following ERCP have focused on recurrent CBD stones, negating the risks of cholecystectomy. This article appraises the role of cholecystectomy following successful endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones.
methodsPatients undergoing ERCP and CBD clearance for choledocholithiasis at St James's University Hospital January 2015-December 2018 were included. Patients were divided into those who received cholecystectomy and those managed non-operatively. Readmissions, operative morbidity, mortality and treatment costs were investigated.
resultsEight hundred and forty-four patients received ERCP and CBD clearance with 3.9 years follow-up. Two hundred and nine patients underwent cholecystectomy with 15% requiring complex surgery. Three hundred and seventy-three patients were non-operatively managed. Unplanned readmissions occurred in 15% following ERCP, mostly within two years. There was no difference in readmissions between the two groups. Accounting for the entire patient pathway, non-operative management was less expensive.
conclusionsThe majority of patients do not require readmission following ERCP for CBD stones, and cholecystectomy did not reduce the risk of readmission. Few patients have recurrent CBD stones, but complex biliary surgery is frequently required. Routine cholecystectomy following ERCP needs to be re-evaluated and a more stratified approach to future risk developed.
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.