ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Seldinger versus Trocar technique for percutaneous cholecystostomy: impact of access route on procedural time and post-procedural pain.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare procedural time (primary outcome) and technical success, clinical success, post-procedural pain and safety outcomes between the Seldinger and Trocar techniques for percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) in high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 169 consecutive patients (Seldinger: n = 130; Trocar: n = 39) who underwent ultrasound-guided PC between January 2020 and August 2024. The primary outcome was procedural time. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, post-procedural pain (defined as the requirement for strong [WHO Step-3] opioid analgesics), adverse events graded per the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) Adverse Event Classification, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable regression with marginalization was used to estimate adjusted associations between technique and outcome, adjusting for disease severity (TG18 grade), comorbidities, gallbladder morphology, and anatomical approach (transhepatic vs. transperitoneal). Inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting and confounder-score adjustment were performed as sensitivity analyses.
resultsThe Trocar technique was significantly faster (median procedural time 81 s [IQR 69-99] vs. 246 s [IQR 199-399]; adjusted mean difference -212.78 s; 95% CI -314.68, - 110.88; p < 0.001). Both techniques achieved high technical (99.2% vs. 100%) and clinical success rates (98.5% vs. 94.9%). Overall opioid requirement did not differ between techniques (adjusted OR 1.01; p = 0.97). A significant interaction (effect modification) was observed between technique and access route: in the transperitoneal subgroup the Seldinger technique was associated with a 7-fold higher risk of severe pain than the Trocar technique (adjusted OR 7.36; 95% CI: 1.48, 36.65; p = 0.015), whereas no difference was found in the transhepatic subgroup. The 30-day crude mortality rate was higher in the Trocar group (23.1% vs. 6.2%); cause-specific adjudication suggested that the excess deaths were attributable to non-biliary sepsis and underlying comorbidities rather than procedure-related events, although residual selection bias toward use of the faster technique in unstable patients cannot be excluded.
conclusionThe Trocar technique is a time-efficient alternative to the Seldinger technique for percutaneous cholecystostomy. Our findings suggest that, when transperitoneal access is anatomically unavoidable, the Trocar technique may be preferred to reduce procedural time and severe post-procedural pain. Confirmation in larger prospective studies is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42334600What 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.