ArticleBMJ open2023
Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care for acute cholecystitis: a Swedish multicentre retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relapse in gallstone disease after non-operative management of acute cholecystitis: a population-based study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Worse cholecystectomy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: were staff shortages or a change in patient case-mix the culprit?Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- [Severe cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic : Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the frequency of surgery and outcome for elective and emergency cholecystectomy: a monocentric retrospective cohort analysis].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe present study aimed to investigate if and how the panorama of acute cholecystitis changed in 2020 in Sweden. Seven aspects were identified, the incidence of cholecystitis, the Tokyo grade, the timing of diagnosis and treatment, the proportion treated with early surgery, the proportion of patients treated with delayed surgery, and new complications from gallstones.
designRetrospective multicentre cohort study.
setting3 hospitals in Sweden, covering 675 000 inhabitants.
participants1634 patients with cholecystitis. OUTCOMES: The incidence, treatment choice and diagnostic and treatment delay were investigated by comparing prepandemic and pandemic patients.
resultsPatients diagnosed with cholecystitis during the pandemic were more comorbid (American Society of Anesthesiologists 2-5, 86% vs 81%, p=0.01) and more often had a diagnostic CT (67% vs 59%, p=0.01). There were variations in the number of patients corresponding with the pandemic waves, but there was no overall increase in the number of patients with cholecystitis (78 vs 76 cases/100 000 inhabitants, p=0.7) or the proportion of patients treated with surgery during the pandemic (50% vs 50%, p=0.4). There was no increase in time to admission from symptoms (both median 1 day, p=0.7), or surgery from admission (both median 1 day, p=0.9). The proportion of grades 2-3 cholecystitis was not higher during the pandemic (46% vs 44%, p=0.9). The median time to elective surgery increased (184 days vs 130 days, p=0.04), but there was no increase in new gallstone complications (35% vs 39%, p=0.3).
conclusionEmergency surgery for cholecystitis was not impacted by the pandemic in Sweden. Patients were more comorbid but did not have more severe cholecystitis nor was there a delay in seeking care. Fewer patients non-operatively managed had elective surgery within 6 months of their initial diagnosis but there was no corresponding increase in gallstone complications.
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.