Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39717317›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

The Rate of Postoperative Bile Leak in Minimally Invasive Liver Resection in Comparison With Open Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Eiad Elmahi, Samantha Fairclough, Harry Knifton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Eiad ElmahiGeneral Surgery, Lincoln County Hospital, Lincoln, GBR.
Samantha FaircloughGeneral Surgery, North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, Peterborough, GBR.
Harry KniftonGeneral Surgery, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid advances in laparoscopic surgery have meant that formerly complex techniques are now commonly performed via this method. These practices are now becoming increasingly popular in the discipline of hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery. One such example is liver resection, which is the focus of our review. We aimed to assess the rate of bile leak complications in minimally invasive liver resection compared to an open liver approach in malignant and benign conditions. A systematic review spanning the period from 2000 to 2022 was conducted, examining the postoperative complications in laparoscopic versus open liver resections. We searched the databases Medline, Cochrane, PubMed, and Google Scholar for relevant studies; 16 studies were included in the final analysis. Ten out of 16 studies that were included indicated that there was no significant difference in the rate of bile leaks. Five studies showed that bile leaks were found to occur more frequently in open surgery, and one study suggested that the rates were more common with the laparoscopic approach. The overall comparison of bile leak rates following open and minimally invasive liver resection suggests that there is no reduction in this complication in both types of surgery. As such, a laparoscopic or open method can both be adopted without any concerns for this particular complication.

Indexed as

hepatectomyhepatobiliary surgerylaparoscopic liver resectionopen liver resectionpost-operative complications

Identifiers

PMID39717317
PMCPMC11665947

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.