ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2025
From the operating room: Surgeons' views on difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2025. 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.
- Feasibility and perioperative outcomes of Senhance-assisted robotic cholecystectomy: a single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds/Aims: Assessing surgical difficulty in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is challenging due to variations in surgeon proficiency and institutional protocols. This study evaluates surgeons' perspectives on procedural difficulty and examines how intraoperative findings and preoperative imaging contribute to refining difficulty assessment criteria. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 50 laparoscopic surgeons in India, providing insights into tolerances for surgical duration and blood loss, reasons for conversion, and predictors of complexity. Responses were analyzed using SPSS, with statistical significance set at Results: Among surveyed surgeons, 82.0% were male, and 78.0% worked in private institutions and 52.0% had performed over 1,000 LCs. Conversion to open surgery was primarily influenced by significant blood loss (68.0%) and biliary injury (94.0%). While 38.0% preferred surgeries under 60 minutes, 26.0% imposed no time constraints. Key intraoperative challenges included dense adhesions, cholecysto-enteric fistulas, and fibrosis. Less experienced surgeons reported greater challenges with scarring adhesions and anatomical variations, but no significant differences were found for other factors like edematous or necrotic changes. Preoperative imaging was considered essential by most surgeons. Conclusions: This study underscores the limited reliability of traditional parameters for assessing difficulty in LC. Surgeons highlighted the importance of objective intraoperative findings and preoperative imaging in predicting surgical challenges. Factors such as adhesions, fibrosis, and anatomical variations significantly impact LC difficulty, with decisions regarding conversion to open surgery largely driven by individual judgment rather than experience. Standardized grading systems incorporating these factors could improve surgical planning, reduce complications, and enhance patient outcomes.
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.