ReviewCureus2025
A Narrative Review of Selective Versus Routine Histopathological Examination of Gallbladders in Low-Risk Patients.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gallbladder diseases are common surgical conditions that often necessitate a cholecystectomy. Traditionally, gallbladder specimens are sent for routine histopathological examination to detect incidental gallbladder carcinoma (IGBC). However, the need for this in low-risk patients remains a subject of debate, particularly considering the low incidence of IGBC and the strain on pathology services. This narrative review aimed to compare selective versus routine histopathological examination of gallbladder specimens in low-risk patients undergoing cholecystectomy. This review complies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted for studies between 2000 and 2022 across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect. Included studies involved patients with low preoperative suspicion of malignancy who were later diagnosed with gall bladder cancer via either routine or selective histopathological examination. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies supporting selective histopathology reported that all cases of IGBC were suspected either preoperatively on imaging or intraoperatively based on macroscopic features. In contrast, studies advocating routine histology identified significant numbers of IGBC in patients with no intraoperative suspicion, including some with advanced-stage disease. These findings suggest that while selective examination may be safe in low-incidence regions with experienced surgical assessment, routine histology remains a more sensitive method in other areas. Selective histopathological examination of gall bladder specimens may be considered in carefully selected low-risk patients, provided a thorough intraoperative evaluation is performed. However, routine examinations remain important in regions with higher disease prevalence.
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.