ArticleCureus2025
A Prospective Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Managing Common Bile Duct Calculi.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Minimally invasive surgical strategies for gallbladder stones with concomitant common bile duct stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Under the Spotlight.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients with Previous Cholecystectomy: A Multicenter Prospective Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCommon bile duct (CBD) calculi are typically managed by either laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The superiority of one method over the other remains a matter of debate. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and morbidity profile of LCBDE and ERCP in the management of CBD calculi. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis analytical cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2021 to July 2024. A total of 72 patients with CBD calculi were included, with 36 undergoing LCBDE and 36 undergoing preoperative ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The primary endpoint was the complete stone clearance rate from the CBD via LCBDE (using either a trans-cystic or supra-duodenal approach) or at the first ERCP procedure. Morbidity and mortality outcomes were also assessed.
resultsThe stone clearance rate was significantly higher in the LCBDE group (88.89%) compared to the ERCP group (72.22%), with an OR of 3.077 and a 95% CI of 0.864-10.954. Retained CBD calculi were noted in 10 patients in the ERCP group, compared to four in the LCBDE group. Two patients in the ERCP group developed acute pancreatitis with elevated amylase and lipase levels. Biliary leaks were observed in two patients in the LCBDE group and one in the ERCP group who succumbed to multidrug-resistant sepsis.
conclusionLCBDE demonstrates higher efficacy in clearing CBD calculi compared to ERCP, especially in patients with multiple and large CBD calculi, with a lower morbidity profile.
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.