ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2023
Comparative evaluation of three laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques in rabbit's model.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improved outcomes and prognostic risk prediction for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure versus T-tube drainage.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this randomized study was to compare the complications and perioperative outcome of three different techniques of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Changes in the liver function test after LC techniques were investigated. Also, we compared the degree of postoperative adhesions and histopathological changes of the liver bed.
methodsThirty rabbits were divided into three groups: group A) Fundus-first technique by Hook dissecting instrument and Roeder Slipknot applied for cystic duct (CD) ligation; group B) conventional technique by Maryland dissecting forceps and electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing (EBVS) for CD seal; group C) conventional technique by EBVS for gallbladder (GB) dissection and CD seal.
resultsGroup A presented a longer GB dissection time than groups B and C. GB perforation and bleeding from tissues adjacent to GB were similar among tested groups. Gamma-glutamyl transferase and alkaline phosphatase levels increased (p ≤ 0.05) on day 3 postoperatively in group A. By the 15th postoperative day, the enzymes returned to the preoperative values. Transient elevation of hepatic transaminases occurred after LC in all groups. Group A had a higher adherence score than groups B and C and was associated with the least predictable technique.
conclusionsLC can be performed using different techniques, although the use of EBVS is highly recommended.
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.