ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Preoperative prediction of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an institutional cross-sectional study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. 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.
- Comment on Preoperative prediction of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), a minimally invasive surgical procedure has largely replaced the open technique for cholecystectomies since the early 1990s and is the treatment of choice for the management of symptomatic gall stone diseases. It has been proved to be an effective and safe procedure in both elective and emergency conditions. However, conversion to open surgery in 2%-10% becomes inevitable. Moreover, surgeons assess difficulty intraoperatively. Preoperative prediction, vital for planning, relies on accurate scoring systems for surgical complexity. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic utility of a preoperative scoring system and identify predictive variables for LC complexity in a tertiary care institution. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted among patients where the preoperative grading system stratified patients into three risk groups: low risk (0-1 score), intermediate risk (2-6 scores), and high risk (7-19 scores). The intraoperative Nassar grading categorized patients into four difficulty levels, ranging from Grade 1 (least difficult) to Grade 4 (most difficult). Dichotomization was adopted to provide a clinically useful distinction between "easy" and "difficult" cases, reflecting real-world operative decision-making. This preoperative scoring scale was employed for assessment and analyzed using SPSS-25. Results: Among 405 consenting participants, 41.2% were males, and 58.8% were females. The mean age was 50.49 ± 14.56 years (Mean ± SD), ranging from 17 to 80. The majority had primary diagnosis of biliary colic (31.4%) followed by chronic cholecystitis (31.1%). Thickened gallbladder walls were noted in 40.5%, common bile duct dilation in 17.5%, with 19.5% undergoing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Anticipated difficult LC was estimated in 158 patients. Intraoperative assessment, utilizing the Nassar grading guideline, revealed that 72.8% of cases were categorized as easy, while 27.2% were classified as difficult. Conclusion: This prospective study demonstrates a clear association between various risk factors and challenging LC. Overview data collection, encompassing demographic, laboratory, and radiological information, supported analytical assessments. However, reliance on a single tertiary care center is a notable limitation, underscoring the need for multicenter studies to validate and identify additional predictors of complexity in LC.
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.