Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40346434›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025

Minimally invasive vs. open radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer: 30-day NSQIP outcomes analysis.

Joshua Hale, Kelsey R Landrum, Chris Agala, Roberto A Vidri, Elizabeth Gleeson, Michael T LeCompte

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Joshua HaleSchool of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Kelsey R LandrumDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Chris AgalaDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Roberto A VidriDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Elizabeth GleesonDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Michael T LeCompteDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. michael_lecompte@med.unc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8853-2957

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadical cholecystectomy (RC) is the standard procedure for gallbladder cancer (GBC) tumors stage TIb or higher. Advances in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) offer the potential for improved outcomes compared to the traditional open surgery. While small series have demonstrated the feasibility of an MIS approach, a detailed comparison of outcomes between the two approaches is lacking.

methodsThe National Surgeon Quality Improvement Database (2010-2021) was queried to identify patients undergoing RC for GBC. Patients with T1b or higher disease were included. Thirty-day all-cause mortality and morbidity were evaluated. To assess associations between outcomes and covariates, we estimated risk ratios and risk differences using generalized linear models and adjusted the estimates using inverse propensity of treatment weights.

results1303 patients were identified (239 MIS, 1064 Open) with 178 excluded due to the need for biliary reconstruction. There was no difference in the primary outcomes of mortality or major morbidity between the groups with four deaths occurring overall and major morbidity rates of MIS = 2.26% and Open = 2.45% (p = 0.7924). Patients who underwent MIS had significantly fewer days in the hospital (3.00 vs.5.00, p < 0.001). After weighting, the MIS group had significantly fewer blood transfusions (2.12% vs. 6.73%, p = 0.009) and superficial surgical site infections (0.45% vs. 3.29%, p = 0.020).

conclusionOur findings contribute to the growing body of evidence supporting MIS for RC as a potential alternative to open resections.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicGallbladder NeoplasmsAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsQuality ImprovementRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeGallbladder carcinomaMinimally invasive surgeryRadical cholecystectomyRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID40346434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.