Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41312258›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2025

Management of common bile duct stones: a comprehensive review.

Xiaojun Wang, Zhifeng Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Xiaojun WangHandan First Hospital, Handan, Hebei, China.
Zhifeng LiHandan First Hospital, Handan, Hebei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CBD stones impose significant morbidity and cost. This review compares the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and summarizes emerging techniques and remaining controversies. While EST remains a cornerstone for rapid stone extraction, particularly in high-risk surgical candidates, its association with post-procedural pancreatitis and long-term sphincter dysfunction underscores the need for judicious patient selection. Conversely, LCBDE emerges as a compelling alternative, offering superior complete stone clearance rates for larger or complex stones, reduced post-procedural pancreatitis, and the unique advantage of direct biliary tree visualization. However, its technical demands and bile leak risk necessitate standardized training protocols and institutional expertise. The review further explores cutting-edge adjunctive therapies, including SpyGlass cholangioscopy for impacted stones, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for large calculi, and artificial intelligence-driven procedural planning, which collectively herald a new era of precision medicine in biliary surgery. Notably, hybrid approaches such as intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) demonstrate promising outcomes in reducing hospitalization and postoperative complications, albeit requiring multidisciplinary team coordination. Despite these advances, critical knowledge gaps persist regarding long-term functional outcomes of EST, cost-effectiveness of emerging technologies, and optimal management of anatomically complex cases. The lack of robust randomized trials comparing EST and LCBDE in diverse patient cohorts limits contemporary guideline development, underscoring the urgent need for high-quality comparative effectiveness research. This review synthesizes current evidence to advocate for a personalized, algorithmic approach to CBD stones management, balancing procedural risks, stone characteristics, and institutional capabilities. By highlighting translational research opportunities and unmet clinical needs, it provides a roadmap for advancing minimally invasive biliary surgery while challenging the global hepatobiliary community to prioritize patient-centered innovation and rigorous outcomes research.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecommon bile duct stonesendoscopic sphincterotomyextracorporeal shock wave lithotripsylaparoscopic common bile duct explorationpersonalized treatmentpost-procedural pancreatitisSpyGlass cholangioscopy

Identifiers

PMID41312258
PMCPMC12647019

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.