Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2023
SAGES safe cholecystectomy modules improve practicing surgeons' judgment: results of a randomized, controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Safety and Errors in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Treatment of Gallstone Disease in Southeastern Mexico.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- ChatGPT and other large language models in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a multidimensional audit of reliability, quality, and readability.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Bile Duct Injury and Litigation in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Global Review of Current and Future Preventative Initiatives.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Review
- A study on the impact of short structured laparoscopy training course: Fellowship of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- SAGES SAFE CHOLE program changes surgeons practice in France-results of the FCVD implementation of SAFE CHOLE in France.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic modified fundus-down cholecystectomy technique: an alternative method for performing a safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy: how to article.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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
12 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, major bile duct injury (BDI) rates during this operation remain unacceptably high. In October 2018, SAGES released the Safe Cholecystectomy modules, which define specific strategies to minimize the risk of BDI. This study aims to investigate whether this curriculum can change the knowledge and behaviors of surgeons in practice.
methodsPracticing surgeons were recruited from the membership of SAGES and the American College of Surgeons Advisory Council for Rural Surgery. All participants completed a baseline assessment (pre-test) that involved interpreting cholangiograms, troubleshooting difficult cases, and managing BDI. Participants' dissection strategies during cholecystectomy were also compared to the strategies of a panel of 15 experts based on accuracy scores using the Think Like a Surgeon validated web-based platform. Participants were then randomized to complete the Safe Cholecystectomy modules (Safe Chole module group) or participate in usually scheduled CME activities (control group). Both groups completed repeat assessments (post-tests) one month after randomization.
resultsOverall, 41 participants were eligible for analysis, including 18 Safe Chole module participants and 23 controls. The two groups had no significant differences in pre-test scores. However, at post-test, Safe Chole module participants made significantly fewer errors managing BDI and interpreting cholangiograms. Safe Chole module participants were less likely to convert to an open operation on the post-test than controls when facing challenging dissections. However, Safe Chole module participants displayed a similar incidence of errors when evaluating adequate critical views of safety.
conclusionsIn this randomized-controlled trial, the SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy modules improved surgeons' abilities to interpret cholangiograms and safely manage BDI. Additionally, surgeons who studied the modules were less likely to convert to open during difficult dissections. These data show the power of the Safe Cholecystectomy modules to affect practicing surgeons' behaviors in a measurable and meaningful way.
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.