ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Fundus-first dissection: a salvage technique for the difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
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
backgroundFundus-first dissection (FFD) is an established salvage technique for difficult cholecystectomies when the critical view of safety (CVS) is unachievable. However, it is not widely practised due to perceived risks of dissecting inflamed or contracted gallbladders or fibrosed cystic pedicles. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of FFD in a large series of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC).
methodsA prospectively maintained database, with retrospective analysis of outcomes of LC performed by a single surgeon between 1992 and 2022. FFD, was employed in Nassar Difficulty Grades 4 and 5 when CVS could not be displayed via antegrade dissection. Patient characteristics, operative findings, operative time, conversion rates and outcomes were described for FFD.
resultsThere were 159 FFDs amongst 1065 Grades 4 or 5 LCs (14.9%). Old age, elective presentations, previous biliary episodes and Grade V difficulty were factors associated with FFD utilisation which reflected increased complexity. No bile duct injuries occurred. In the FFD group, subtotal cholecystectomy and open conversion were required in 3.1% each. FFD resulted in a significant decline in conversions over the three decades. Multivariable adjustment for case complexity showed adverse outcomes were driven by patient ASA ≥ 3 and difficulty grade V, whilst FFD technique was not independently associated with increased odds of major complications. Temporal analysis revealed an evolving practice pattern and 35-fold reduction in conversions over three decades.
conclusionThe FFD salvage approach to difficult LC has an acceptable risk profile when CVS was unachievable. Total cholecystectomy was achieved in 96.9% of FFD cases with acceptable complication rates given the increased anatomical complexity. After adjustment for confounders, adverse outcomes appeared to be driven by case complexity rather than the FFD technique itself. FFD is a viable salvage approach in experienced hands. External validation and specialisation are needed before generalising to broader surgical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42637947What 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.