ArticleCureus2026
Surgical Complications in Conventional and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in an Ecuadorian Reference Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cholecystectomy is a very common surgical intervention that consists of the removal of the gallbladder, especially when complications such as cholecystitis exist. The laparoscopic technique has been associated with greater postsurgical benefits; however, no local research has been conducted comparing these two techniques, considering that in poor-income countries, there are hospitals that do not have the technological and economic resources available to perform laparoscopic surgeries. This project aimed to determine the differences between open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy, in terms of complications, in patients in the general surgery service from January to June 2024 at the Hospital Provincial General Docente Riobamba, Ecuador. We present an original, observational, cross-sectional, retrospective, quantitative study, with a descriptive and inferential approach. Of a total sample of 107 patients, 69 (64.5%) underwent conventional cholecystectomy and 38 (35.5%) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, of whom the main pathology was cholelithiasis in 100 (93%) cases. A total of 12 (11%) patients presented complications, and the most frequent were biliary leakage and injury to a nearby organ; 26 (24%) had comorbidities, predominantly type 2 diabetes and hypertension. There was insufficient evidence to determine differences between open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy with the occurrence of surgical complications (p > 0.05). Emergency surgery and the presence of comorbidities conferred a higher probability of surgical complications (OR: 3.53, 95% CI: 1.029 - 12.08, p = 0.049 and OR: 3.75, 95% CI: 1.09 - 12.89, p = 0.028, respectively). It is concluded that there are no differences in complications regarding the type of cholecystectomy (open or laparoscopic), but there were differences in the presence of comorbidities and whether the surgery was an emergency procedure.
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.