Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40991133›Full record

Observational studyUpdates in surgery2026

Optimal timing for cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy: insights from a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Antonio Pesce, Camilo Ramírez-Giraldo, Matteo Matteucci, Juan Camilo Toro-Rodríguez, Simón Macías-Segura, Gaetano Piccolo, Riccardo Masserano, Gabriella Capolupo, Valentina Miacci, Filippo Carannante and 12 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy after percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage and the risk of bailout surgery: a restricted cubic spline analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Article
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

22 authors.

Antonio Pesce *Department of Surgery, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale Ferrara, University of Ferrara, Via Valle Oppio, 2, 44023, Lagosanto, FE, Italy. nino.fish@hotmail.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7560-551X
Camilo Ramírez-Giraldo *Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario Mayor-Méderi, Bogotá, Colombia.
Matteo MatteucciUOC General Surgery, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy.
Juan Camilo Toro-RodríguezGrupo de Investigación Clínica, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia.
Simón Macías-SeguraGrupo de Investigación Clínica, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia.
Gaetano PiccoloUOC General Surgery, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo MasseranoUOC General Surgery, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy.
Gabriella CapolupoUOC Colorectal Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Valentina MiacciUOC Colorectal Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Filippo CarannanteUOC Colorectal Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni CestaroUOC General Surgery, ASST-VALLE OLONA, Ospedale San Antonio Abate, Gallarate, VA, Italy.
Carlo StracqualursiUOC General Surgery, ASST-VALLE OLONA, Ospedale San Antonio Abate, Gallarate, VA, Italy.
Francesco RoscioUOC General Surgery, ASST-VALLE OLONA, Ospedale San Antonio Abate, Gallarate, VA, Italy.
Alessandro GeminiUOC Digestive and Emergency Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria di Terni, Terni, Italy.
Antonia RizzutoDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Magna Græcia University, Catanzaro, Italy.
Mimi YenUOC General Surgery, ASST-Ovest Milanese, Ospedale di Legnano, Milan, Italy.
Andrea MingoliDepartment of Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
Bruno CirilloDepartment of Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
Augusto LauroDepartment of Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
Vito D'AndreaDepartment of Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
Andrés Isaza-RestrepoDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Universitario Mayor-Méderi, Bogotá, Colombia.
Roberto CirocchiUOC Digestive and Emergency Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria di Terni, Terni, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard of care for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical candidates who do not respond to conservative management, percutaneous cholecystostomy is recommended. When used as bridge therapy, the optimal timing for performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy as definitive treatment still remains uncertain. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the incidence of major perioperative complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III. A retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was conducted across nine hospitals-seven in Italy and two in Colombia. We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy at the participating institutions between January 2020 and December 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the 50th percentile (median) of the time interval between procedures, which was 59 days. Accordingly, the groups were defined as ≤ 59 days (approximately ≤ 8 weeks) and > 59 days (approximately > 8 weeks). A total of 123 patients were included in the study. The median age was 75.0 years, and the majority were male (56.1%). Logistic regression analysis showed that older age and an open surgical approach were significantly associated with a higher risk of major complications. The time interval between cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy was not significantly associated with the risk of major complications in any model. However, in the sensitivity analysis-after excluding outliers above the 95th percentile and below the 5th percentile-the incidence of major complications was 21.1% in the ≤ 8 weeks group versus 11.3% in the > 8 weeks group, without statistically significant differences (p = 0.262). The results of this study suggest that, within the observed range of intervals, no definitive advantage can be attributed to either earlier or delayed surgery based solely on timing. There remains a critical need for a rigorously designed, multicenter prospective study to determine the optimal timing of surgery based on clinically meaningful endpoints.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicCholecystitis, AcuteCholecystostomyTime-to-TreatmentAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsBridge to surgeryLaparoscopic cholecystectomyOptimal timingPercutaneous cholecystostomyPostoperative complicationsSurgical risk

Identifiers

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.