ArticleCureus2024
Factors Influencing the Achievement of the Critical View of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective Observational Study in Yemen.
Article 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.
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.
- Anticipating critical view of safety challenges in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis patients: Can we predict them earlier?Turkish journal of surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The critical view of safety (CVS) is a critical technique to minimize the risk of bile duct injuries (BDIs) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study evaluated the rate of CVS achievement and examined factors influencing its success. Methods This prospective study included 97 patients undergoing LC. Data on demographic characteristics, preoperative factors, surgical difficulty, and surgeon experience were collected. CVS achievement was assessed using Strasberg's criteria, and associated factors were analyzed. Results CVS was successfully achieved in 31 of 97 cases (32%), while it was not achieved in 66 cases (68%). Factors significantly associated with failure to achieve CVS included previous abdominal surgery (p = 0.024), prior endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (p = 0.024), acute cholecystitis (p = 0.024), and higher difficulty grades according to the modified Nassar scale (p < 0.001). Although there was no statistically significant difference in CVS achievement between specialists and residents (p = 0.223), specialists had a higher success rate (37.5%) compared to residents (28%). Achieving CVS was associated with shorter operative times (mean: 60 vs. 70 minutes, p < 0.001) and reduced use of postoperative drains (16.1% vs. 83.9%, p < 0.001). Importantly, no BDIs were observed. Conclusion Achieving CVS remains a challenge, particularly in complex cases and patients with prior abdominal interventions or acute inflammation. Enhanced surgical training, meticulous preoperative planning, and the use of adjunctive technologies may improve CVS success rates and contribute to safer outcomes in LC.
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.