ArticleClinical endoscopy2025
Percutaneous cholecystolithotomy and lithotripsy for managing acute calculous cholecystitis in non-surgical candidates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 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.
- Long-term outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage without cholecystectomy: impact of comorbidity and potential role of stone removal.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Interventional Radiology in Acute Cholecystitis: A Review of Contemporary Percutaneous Strategies and Emerging Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
backgroundThis study aimed to review and update the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of percutaneous cholecystolithotomy/lithotripsy (PCCL) for managing acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) in non-surgical candidates.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase was conducted. We included studies focusing on the use of PCCL in patients deemed ineligible for surgery owing to ACC and reporting outcomes such as technical success, stone clearance, recurrence, and length of hospital stay. This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
resultsMeta-analysis of 13 studies showed a technical success rate of 97%, with stone and cholecystitis recurrence in 10% and 1% of cases, respectively. The pooled average length of hospital stay was 2.79 days. Complications included retained stones (3%), duct perforations (6%), catheter displacement (5%), bleeding (4%), and bile leakage (5%). A sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these results.
conclusionsPCCL demonstrated high efficacy with minimal recurrence and low complication rates in managing ACC in non-surgical candidates. Further randomized controlled trials are necessary to compare its efficacy and safety with standard care approaches, such as cholecystectomy or percutaneous cholecystostomy.
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.