Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38172774›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2024

Post-cholecystectomy bile duct injuries: a retrospective cohort study.

Mohamed Hossam El-Din Zidan, Mostafa Seif-Eldeen, Abdelhamid A Ghazal, Mustafa Refaie

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Endoscopic repair of Strasberg type D bile duct injury following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an unconventional approach.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025
    Article
  7. Endoscopic management of cystic stump leaks: Insights from a tertiary care center.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamed Hossam El-Din ZidanFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. mohamed.hessien1171@alexmed.edu.eg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7425-356X
Mostafa Seif-EldeenFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4951-016X
Abdelhamid A GhazalFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Mustafa RefaieFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0163-1707
Alexandria University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBile duct injury (BDI) is still a major worrisome complication that is feared by all surgeons undergoing cholecystectomy. The overall incidence of biliary duct injuries falls between 0.2 and 1.3%. BDI classification remains an important method to define the type of injury conducted for investigation and management. Recently, a Consensus has been taken to define BDI using the ATOM classification. Early management brings better results than delayed management. The current perspective in biliary surgery is the laparoscopic role in diagnosing and managing BDI. Diagnostic laparoscopy has been conducted in various entities for diagnostic and therapeutic measures in minor and major BDIs.

methods35 cases with iatrogenic BDI following cholecystectomy (after both open and laparoscopic approaches) both happened in or were referred to Alexandria Main University Hospital surgical department from January 2019 till May 2022 and were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were classified according to the ATOM classification. Management options undertaken were mentioned and compared to the timing of diagnosis, and the morbidity and mortality rates (using the Clavien-Dindo classification).

results35 patients with BDI after both laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (54.3%), and Open cholecystectomy (OC) (45.7%) (20% were converted and 25.7% were Open from the start) were classified according to ATOM classification. 45.7% were main bile duct injuries (MBDI), and 54.3% were non-main bile duct injuries (NMBDI), where only one case 2.9% was associated with vasculobiliary injury (VBI). 28% (n = 10) of the cases were diagnosed intraoperatively (Ei), 62.9% were diagnosed early postoperatively (Ep), and 8.6% were diagnosed in the late postoperative period (L). LC was associated with 84.2% of the NMBDI, and only 18.8% of the MBDI, compared to OC which was associated with 81.3% of the MBDI, and 15.8% of the NMBDI. By the Clavien-Dindo classification, 68.6% fell into Class IIIb, 20% into Class I, 5.7% into Class V (mortality rate), 2.9% into Class IIIa, and 2.9% into Class IV. The Clavien-Dindo classification and the patient's injury (type and time of detection) were compared to investigation and management options.

conclusionManagement options should be defined individually according to the mode of presentation, the timing of detection of injury, and the type of injury. Early detection and management are associated with lower morbidity and mortality. Diagnostic Laparoscopy was associated with lower morbidity and better outcomes. A proper Reporting checklist should be designed to help improve the identification of injury types.

Indexed as

Bile Duct DiseasesCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicBile DuctsCholecystectomyHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeATOM classificationBile duct injuryBiliary duct injuriesCholecystectomyClavien-Dindo classificationDiagnostic laparoscopyLaparoscopic cholecystectomyLaparoscopic roux-en Y hepaticojejunostomyOpen cholecystectomyRe-laparoscopyStrasberg classification

Identifiers

PMID38172774
PMCPMC10765830
OpenAlexW4390533509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.