Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39320569›Full record

Trial reportUpdates in surgery2024

Two institutes' experience in laparoendoscopic "rendezvous" technique for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for stones in the gallbladder and bile duct: a prospective randomized comparative clinical trial.

Mohamed Farid, Azza Baz, Alaaedin Ramadan, Mohamed Elhorbity, Ashraf Amer, Ahmed Arafa

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Updates in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Single-stage outpatient laparoendoscopic treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mohamed FaridAssistant Professor of General Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig City, Egypt. mohammad.fareed55@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4522-5989
Azza BazAssociate Fellow of General Surgery, Al-Ahrar Teaching Hospital, Zagazig City, Egypt.
Alaaedin RamadanLecturer of General Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig City, Egypt.
Mohamed ElhorbityAssistant Professor of General Surgery, Banha University, Banha City, Egypt.
Ashraf AmerFellow of General Surgery, Al-Ahrar Teaching Hospital, Zagazig City, Egypt.
Ahmed ArafaAssistant Professor of General Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig City, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is still disagreement on the best treatment option for cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Although there are some benefits to the single-step procedure, the "laparoendoscopic rendezvous" (LERV) technique that include a lower risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and a shorter hospital stay, the standard technique is still the two-step approach for clearing the common bile duct (CBD) using ERCP and then performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of the LERV technique vs. the standard two-step approach. Four hundred thirty-six patients with symptomatized concomitant stones at both the gall bladder (GB) and the (CBD), at two gastroenterology centers in Zagazig city, Egypt, from January 2010 till April 2022, were analyzed. Patients were randomly divided into two equally groups. The overall length of hospital stay was the primary outcome, and the success of CBD clearance and morbidity, particularly post-ERCP pancreatitis, were the secondary endpoints. The LERV group experienced a significantly shorter hospital stay (median 2(2-8) days compared to 4.5 (4-11) days for the two-stage approach (p < 0.001)). The two groups did not differ in terms of CBD clearing success. Also, there was no significant difference in the number of patients with post-ERCP pancreatitis between the LERV group [14 patients (6.4%)] and the two-stage approach [26 patients (11.9%)] with p value = 0.703. For patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis, the optimal treatment must be determined by the knowledge and resources that are accessible locally. Our data further supported the idea that treating patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis in one stage is a safe and successful strategy.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicGallstonesLength of StayAdultAgedCholedocholithiasisEgyptFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreatitisProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCommon bile duct stones (CBDS)Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES)Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (IO-ERCP)Laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV)Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)

Identifiers

PMID39320569
PMCPMC11541338

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.