ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Bile duct injury versus choledocholithiasis: does one outweigh the other in the decision to use intraoperative cholangiogram during laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A model-based economic analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRoutine intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) remains controversial. Current literature evaluating routine (rIOC) versus selective (sIOC) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) often overlooks the impact of bile duct injuries (BDIs) and choledocholithiasis.
methodsDecision analysis models evaluated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of rIOC versus sIOC during LC. Models were based on 0.36 and 0.53% BDI detection in rIOC and sIOC, and 11.8% and 3.9% choledocholithiasis, respectively. Sensitivity analysis assessed model robustness to data input changes.
resultssIOC was associated with $18,600 and 0.90 QALYs, while rIOC increased costs by $1,300 and reduced QALYs, consistent in 93% of probabilistic sensitivity analyses. In choledocholithiasis with high likelihood of persistence, rIOC was preferred in 88% of iterations. DISCUSSION: rIOC increases costs without improving QALY when considering both choledocholithiasis and BDI. rIOC was preferred in high-risk choledocholithiasis, implying that judicious intraoperative management of choledocholithiasis is prudent in the decision to utilize IOC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42257959What 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.