SynthesisJournal of ultrasound2026
Ultrasound-guided percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of ultrasound, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound-guided percutaneous cholecystostomy (US-PC) is widely used in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis. Still, success and safety rates specific to US guidance are not always distinguished within mixed 'image-guided' series.
objectiveTo estimate technical success, clinical success, and major complication rates of US-PC.
methodsPrimary studies explicitly reporting US-PC or with separable data were included. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: technical success, clinical success (as defined by the study), and major adverse events (AEs). Single-arm meta-analysis using random-effects (logit, continuity correction); heterogeneity by I2 and prediction interval.
resultsFour eligible single-arm studies for technical success (N = 466). Pooled technical success 99.3% (95%CI 97.8-99.8; I2 = 0%). Three studies (N = 223) reported clinical success: pooled 97.6% (95%CI 83.4-99.7; I
conclusionsIn high-risk patients, US-PC demonstrates very high technical success and low major complication rates; clinical success is high but variably defined across studies. Further direct comparisons and standardized definitions are warranted.
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.