Observational studySurgical endoscopy2024
Subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conversion to open as a bailout procedure: a cohort study.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mucosal stripping cholecystectomy as a novel bailout procedure when subtotal cholecystectomy is not feasible: a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Subtotal cholecystectomy as a bailout strategy in difficult cholecystectomy: Outcomes and patient selection criteria.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
- Navigating the Impossible Gallbladder: Bailout Strategies and Culture of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Cureus · 2026Review
- Which is the best timing for performing a cholecystectomy after percutaneous cholecystostomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate morbidity and mortality in patients taken to conversion to open procedure (CO) and subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) as bailout procedures when performing difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
methodThis observational cohort study retrospectively analyzed patients taken to SLC or CO as bailout surgery during difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2014 and 2022. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors for morbimortality.
resultsA total of 675 patients were included. Of the 675 patients (mean [SD] age 63.85 ± 16.00 years; 390 [57.7%] male) included in the analysis, 452 (67%) underwent CO and 223 (33%) underwent SLC. Overall, neither procedure had an increased risk of major complications (89 [19.69%] vs 35 [15.69%] P.207). However, CO had an increased risk of bile duct injury (18 [3.98] vs 1 [0.44] P.009), bleeding (mean [SD] 165.43 ± 368.57 vs 43.25 ± 123.42 P < .001), intestinal injury (20 [4.42%] vs 0 [0.00] P.001), and wound infection (18 [3.98%] vs 2 [0.89%] P.026), while SLC had a higher risk of bile leak (15 [3.31] vs 16 [7.17] P.024). On the multivariable analysis, Charlson comorbidity index (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; CI95%, 1.01-1.42), use of anticoagulant agents (OR, 2.56; CI95%, 1.21-5.44), classification of severity of cholecystitis grade III (OR, 2.96; CI95%, 1.48-5.94), and emergency admission (OR, 6.07; CI95%, 1.33-27.74) were associated with presenting major complications.
conclusionsSLC was less associated with complications; however, there is scant evidence on its long-term outcomes. Further research is needed on SLC to establish if it is the safest in the long-term as a bailout procedure.
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.