Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39961819›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025

Open versus laparoscopic oncologic resection for gallbladder cancer after index cholecystectomy: international multicenter comparative study.

Łukasz Masior, Maciej Krasnodębski, Emilia Kruk, Martín de Santibañes, Pedro Uad, Juan Ramos, Michał Pędziwiatr, Wojciech Serednicki, Gilton Marques Fonseca, Paulo Herman and 14 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. 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. Review
  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

24 authors.

Łukasz MasiorDepartment of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha Street 1A, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland. lukasz.masior@wum.edu.pl.
Maciej KrasnodębskiDepartment of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha Street 1A, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland.
Emilia KrukDepartment of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha Street 1A, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland.
Martín de SantibañesHepato-pancreato-biliary and liver transplant unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Pedro UadHepato-pancreato-biliary and liver transplant unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Juan RamosHepato-pancreato-biliary and liver transplant unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Michał Pędziwiatr2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland.
Wojciech Serednicki2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland.
Gilton Marques FonsecaDigestive Surgery Division, Liver Surgery Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital das Clinicas, University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paulo HermanDigestive Surgery Division, Liver Surgery Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital das Clinicas, University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Robert P SutcliffeDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Ravi MarudanayagamDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Alessandro ParenteDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Arianeb MehrabiDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ali RamouzDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Peter LodgeHPB and Transplant Unit, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Keyur ShahHPB and Transplant Unit, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Hauke LangGeneral, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Constantin ScholzGeneral, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Ganesh GunasekaranDepartment of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA.
Nazanin KhajoueinejadDepartment of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA.
Samantha TroobDepartment of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA.
Marek KrawczykDepartment of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha Street 1A, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland.
Michał GrątDepartment of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Banacha Street 1A, Warsaw, 02-097, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiver resection and lymphadenectomy is a standard procedure in patients with incidental gallbladder cancer. Data regarding laparoscopic approach in this setting are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic and open approach in this population.

methodsThis was a multicenter retrospective study including 177 patients. The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes measures were recurrence-free survival (RFS), lymph node yield, operative time, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.

resultsSurgery was laparoscopic in 60 (33.9%), including 18 conversions (30.0%). By intention to treat analysis, 3 and 5 year OS were 72.1% and 51.8% after laparoscopic surgery compared to 62.8% and 36.2% after open surgery (p = 0.201). 3- and 5-year RFS were 29.1% and 19.4% after laparoscopic surgery and 28.7% and 19.1% after open surgery (p = 0.697). Severe (grade ≥ 3 ) complications (p = 0.032) and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI; p = 0.027) were both significantly higher after laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.032), although length of hospital stay was significantly shorter after laparoscopic procedures both on intention-to-treat (median 6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.004) and per protocol analysis (median 6 vs. 8 days; p = 0.004).

conclusionsLaparoscopic approach is feasible in patients with gallbladder cancer and may shorten the duration of hospital stay. SYNOPSIS: This retrospective cohort study suggests that laparoscopic liver resection is feasible in patients with gallbladder cancer and may shorten the duration of hospital stay. Minimally invasive procedures should be performed by surgeons experienced in laparoscopic liver surgery.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicGallbladder NeoplasmsHepatectomyLaparoscopyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeComplicationsGallbladder cancerLaparoscopic liver resectionLength of stayOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID39961819
PMCPMC11832698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.