ArticleJournal of surgical case reports2025
Large common bile duct stone: a case report.
Article in Journal of surgical case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Choledocholithiasis, the presence of stones within the common bile duct (CBD), poses significant therapeutic challenges, especially when stones exceed 15 mm in diameter. Large CBD stones can lead to complications such as biliary obstruction, cholangitis, and pancreatitis. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the first-line treatment; however, surgical intervention may be required for refractory cases. We present a case of a 50-year-old female with a giant CBD stone measuring 6 × 4 × 4 cm, managed successfully via open CBD exploration and T-tube placement after failed endoscopic extraction. This case underscores the importance of tailored management strategies for complex biliary stone disease. While ERCP remains the gold standard, open CBD exploration remains a viable option for large, impacted stones.
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.