ArticleBJS open2025
Waiting for cholecystectomy: determinants of prioritization for delayed cholecystectomy in a universal public healthcare system-post hoc analysis of RELAPSTONE cohort (WAIT-CHOL study).
Article in BJS open, 2025. 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
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSymptomatic gallstone disease is a common and burdensome condition, with early cholecystectomy recommended to prevent relapses. However, delayed cholecystectomies lack standardized prioritization criteria. This study aimed to identify determinants independently associated with shorter waiting times for delayed cholecystectomy, and to assess the alignment of current surgical prioritization with relapse predictors described in the previous RELAPSTONE study.
methodsThis was a post hoc analysis of the Spanish RELAPSTONE cohort, comprising patients admitted for a first episode of symptomatic gallstone disease between January 2018 and April 2020, who did not undergo cholecystectomy during the index hospital admission. The primary outcome was waiting time (in months) to delayed cholecystectomy. Linear regression models with β-coefficients were used to identify clinical factors associated with surgical delays (primary outcome of interest). Secondarily, the impact of relapse on prioritization was also evaluated.
resultsThis study analysed 1508 patients of the 3016 included in the RELAPSTONE cohort. Median age was 68.2 (interquartile range 53.9-76.6) years; 51.4% were men. Median waiting time to delayed cholecystectomy was 4.5 (interquartile range 2.3-7.0) months. Initial presentation as acute cholecystitis (β = -2.2, P = 0.048) and multiple cholelithiasis (β = -0.6, P = 0.006) were linked to shorter waiting times, whereas older age (> 54 years; β = 0.8, P = 0.002), advanced liver disease (β = 2.4, P = 0.047), and relapse (β = 0.5, P = 0.036) were associated with longer delays, compared with their respective reference groups. Among 575 patients (38.1%) with relapse, time to delayed cholecystectomy did not differ by relapse type. Several known risk factors for relapse identified in previous RELAPSTONE analyses, including the performance of endoscopic sphincterotomy and leucocyte and alanine aminotransferase levels, did not influence prioritization.
conclusionDeterminants of surgical timing were not well aligned with previously identified predictors of relapse. These findings support the need for evidence-based triage strategies to improve timing and outcomes of delayed cholecystectomy.
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.