ReviewCureus2024
Converting From Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy to Open Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review of Its Advantages and Reasoning.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are We Overtesting? Rethinking Routine Blood Work After Low-Risk Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Audit of Postoperative Complications and Conversion Rate in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Cureus · 2025Article
- Multicenter external validation of a nomogram predicting conversion to open cholecystectomy during laparoscopic surgery for acute calculous cholecystitis: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cholecystectomy is the standard treatment for symptomatic cholelithiasis and asymptomatic impending biliary obstruction, which is typically carried out laparoscopically. However, difficult gallbladders, due to distorted anatomy or increased risk of bleeding, can necessitate conversion to open surgery. This systematic review evaluates the advantages, disadvantages, complications, and outcomes of laparoscopic versus converted open cholecystectomy. We screened articles published from 2011 to 2024 by utilizing advanced filters of PubMed, Cochrane, and Scholar databases. Exclusion criteria included non-English language articles, duplicates, and animal studies. After analyzing relevant articles, 31 articles were included in this study. The total number of participants who underwent laparoscopic procedures was 28,054, of which 5,847 were converted from laparoscopic to open procedures. Conversions were primarily due to bleeding, adhesions, and obscured anatomy, with bile leakage being the most common short-term complication. Converted cases showed higher rates of long-term complications, increased hospital stays, and higher morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains safe and effective, but identifying high-risk patients for conversion is important. Preoperative identification of high-risk patients and recognizing predictive factors for conversion can enhance surgical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally preferred, timely conversion to open surgery is essential for patient safety.
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.