Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39814585›Full record

ArticleJournal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences2025

A retrospective comparative study of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage versus endoscopic gallbladder stenting on the clinical course of acute cholecystitis: A propensity score matching analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan.

Shota Ebinuma, Hiroyuki Nagano, Hisashi Itoshima, Susumu Kunisawa, Kiyohide Fushimi, Ryo Sugiura, Tatsuhiko Kakisaka, Akinobu Taketomi, Yuichi Imanaka

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences, 2025. 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. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Shota EbinumaDepartment of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Hiroyuki NaganoDepartment of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Hisashi ItoshimaDepartment of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Susumu KunisawaDepartment of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Kiyohide FushimiDepartment of Health Policy and Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Ryo SugiuraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4156-8025
Tatsuhiko KakisakaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery I, Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Akinobu TaketomiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery I, Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Yuichi ImanakaDepartment of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4613-2159

Funding

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare JPMH21IA1005Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare JPMH22AA2003Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare JPMH24AA2006Welfare and JSPS KAKENHI from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP23H00448
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a retrospective comparative study to clarify the optimal gallbladder drainage method prior to elective cholecystectomy.

methodsWe collected data from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database about cholecystitis patients who underwent gallbladder drainage prior to cholecystectomy in a subsequent hospitalization between April 2014 and March 2020. We divided the study population into two groups: an endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) group and a percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) group. We performed propensity score matching and compared surgical outcomes related to cholecystectomy.

resultsWe collected 6306 cases (PTGBD: 6112 cases; EGBS: 194 cases). In propensity score matching, we obtained 193 matched pairs from the study population. Long-term postoperative antibiotics therapy (2 vs. 9; risk ratio 4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9]) was more frequent in the EGBS group than the PTGBD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for laparotomic cholecystectomy and postoperative bile duct drainage. For reoperation, postoperative abdominal drainage and postoperative blood transfusion, there were few outcome occurrences and effect measures were not obtained.

conclusionGallbladder drainage by EGBS may have more risk of surgical complications related to elective cholecystectomy than PTGBD. There are a few reports on this topic, so further research should be conducted.

Indexed as

Cholecystitis, AcuteDrainageStentsAgedCholecystectomyDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcomecholecystectomycholecystitisendoscopic gallbladder stentingpercutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainagepropensity score matching

Identifiers

PMID39814585
PMCPMC11926946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.