ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery2024
Laparoscopic choledochal cyst excision and biliary reconstruction in patients with previous surgery/ intervention: Feasibility and outcome.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic Excision of Choledochal Cysts with Roux-en-Y Hepaticojejunostomy in Children: Surgical Technique, Experience, and Outcomes.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery in complicated choledochal cyst (CDC) with previous interventions (laparotomy or biliary drainage). PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with CDC who underwent surgery from July 2014 to July 2019 were evaluated. CDC without previous interventions (Group A) was compared with CDC that had previous interventions (Group B) to assess the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery.
resultsIn 5 years' period, 38 patients were operated for CDC. The mean age was similar in both groups (3.78 ± 2.27 in Group A and 4.08 ± 2.73 in Group B). Out of six CDC with previous intervention (Group B), five patients were previously managed at other institutions as follows: (1) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) stenting. (2) Laparotomy for biliary peritonitis and ERCP. (3) Percutaneous drainage of the large cyst. (4) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. (5) ERCP stenting. (6) Percutaneous drainage for biliary ascites. All patients underwent laparoscopic CDC excision and hepatico-duodenostomy. The mean duration of surgery was 160.3 ± 17.22 in Group A and 169.2 ± 17.5 in Group B ( P = 0.258). None required intraoperative blood transfusion. None had a bile leak. Drain was removed at 4.47 ± 0.98 in Group A, while at 4.17 ± 0.75 days in Group B ( P = 0.481). There was statistically no significant difference in feed starting time or length of stay. In follow-up of 6 months-3 years, all patients are asymptomatic.
conclusionsLaparoscopy in complicated CDC with previous intervention is technically tedious but is feasible. The procedure is safe and delivers a good outcome.
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.