Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40551728›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

A Narrative Review of Selective Versus Routine Histopathological Examination of Gallbladders in Low-Risk Patients.

Sathyaseelan Arumugam, Shaurya Aggarwal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

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

2 authors.

Sathyaseelan ArumugamGeneral and Colorectal Surgery, Lister Hospital, East and North Hertfordshire Teaching NHS Trust, Stevenage, GBR.
Shaurya AggarwalGeneral and Colorectal Surgery, Lister Hospital, East and North Hertfordshire Teaching NHS Trust, Stevenage, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

cholangiocarcinomacholecystectomygallbladder cancerhistologyroutineselectivespecimen’s

Identifiers

PMID40551728
PMCPMC12184954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.