ReviewCureus2024
Impact of Surgical Timing on Outcomes in Patients With Acute Cholecystitis: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to conduct a thorough analysis of the existing studies to determine how patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) respond to surgical intervention at different times following their diagnosis. To locate studies that met the inclusion criteria, a thorough computerized search of relevant databases was carried out. A comprehensive search was carried out on PubMed, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to locate relevant material. Our data included seven trials with 48,747 patients: 40,955 in the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) group and 7,792 in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) group. More than half of the participants (27,687, 56.8%) were female. ELC was found to be safe regardless of when symptoms first appeared, challenging previous assumptions that surgery should be delayed during the initial symptomatic period. Mortality rates for ELC were consistently low, ranging from 0% to 3.9% in all groups, while complication rates varied from 3.5% to 12.5% in all groups as well. Although DLC is still considered safe, the likelihood of complications such as bile duct damage and surgical site infections appeared to increase, particularly in patients who underwent surgery more than three days after the diagnosis of cholecystitis. It is important to note that ELC refers to surgery performed within the first three days after diagnosis, while DLC refers to surgery performed after three days. The systematic review reveals that ELC is a secure and successful remedy for sudden cholecystitis, offering superior outcomes compared to DLC. ELC is associated with lower complication rates, reduced hospital stays, and minimal mortality, suggesting it should be the preferred approach in most cases (performing the surgery within the first three days following the diagnosis of AC). While DLC remains a viable option, particularly for certain patient populations, it carries a higher risk of complications and prolonged recovery times.
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.