ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024
Continuous versus interrupted anastomotic technique for the hepaticojejunostomy: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous vs. interrupted suturing in hepaticojejunostomy: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Continuous or Interrupted Suture for Hepaticojejunostomy in Pancreaticoduodenectomy (The HEKTIK Trial): Findings of a Randomized, Controlled, Single-Center Superiority Trial.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Trial
- [Biliodigestive anastomosis: technique and outcome].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Retrospective evaluation of transhepatic biliary stent placement in patients undergoing hepaticojejunostomy.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Interrupted sutures is the gold standard technique of hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) for bilioenteric anastomosis. This study compares the safety and early complications of continuous and interrupted suture HJ. Methods: A prospective study involving all elective HJ between September 2019 and June 2021 was conducted. Patients with type IV or V biliary strictures, duct diameter less than 8 mm and/or associated vascular injury, and bilateral HJ were excluded. The study patients were divided into two random groups; interrupted and continuous anastomotic technique. Patient demographics, preoperative parameters including pathology (benign vs. malignant), HJ leak, suture time, and postoperative morbidity were recorded. Results: Total 34 patients were enroled. Eighteen (52.9%) were into interrupted and 16 (47.1%) patients into the continuous group. Both the groups were comparable with regards to demographics, haemoglobin, serum albumin, preoperative cholangitis and biliary stenting. Total three (8.8%) patients in the entire study developed bile leak; interrupted-2 and continuous-1, which was not significant statistically ( Conclusions: Both the techniques is safe with comparable morbidity. Further, continuous has an added advantage of decreased anastomotic time and cost.
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.