SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Safety and efficacy comparison of single-stage and two-stage ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Objective: This meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of single-stage and two-stage ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of bile duct stones. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases to identify prospective randomized controlled studies comparing the effectiveness of single-stage ERCP combined with laparoscopy, also known as Laparoscopic-Endoscopic Rendezvous (LERV), and the sequential two-step approach of ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC). Stone clearance success rate, incidence of complications, occurrence of pancreatitis, and hyperamylasemia were analyzed using Stata software. Results: Nine studies involving a total of 1,003 participants were included in the analysis, with 505 patients undergoing sequential surgery and 498 patients receiving LERV treatment. The LERV group exhibited a significantly higher stone clearance rate compared to the sequential surgery group (RR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.49-0.79). The incidence of pancreatitis was significantly higher in the sequential surgery group compared to LERV (RR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.61-2.24). Similarly, the occurrence of hyperamylasemia was significantly higher in the sequential surgery group compared to LERV (RR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.55-2.40). Conclusion: The findings of this meta-analysis support the effectiveness of LERV as a treatment option for bile duct stones. LERV demonstrates superior outcomes compared to the sequential two-step approach of ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC). Specifically, LERV shows improved stone clearance success rates and a decreased incidence of pancreatitis. These results suggest that LERV is a safe and efficient procedure for the management of bile duct stones. Systematic review registration: 2025100075, https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2025.10.0075.
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.