↓ Skip to main content

Role of intraoperative cholangiography for detecting residual stones after biliary pancreatitis: still useful? A retrospective study

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Role of intraoperative cholangiography for detecting residual stones after biliary pancreatitis: still useful? A retrospective study
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13017-017-0130-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abdelrahman Abdelaal, Moamena El-Matbouly, Ibnouf Sulieman, Ahmad Elfaki, Tamer El-Bakary, Sherif Abdelaziem, Salahdin Gehani, Adriana Toro, Isidoro Di Carlo

Abstract

Intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) may detect residual stones in the common bile duct (CBD) after acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP). The aim of the present study is to analyze the utility of IOC in detecting residual stones in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for ABP and if complications are related with this procedure. Demographic and clinical factors were assessed in patients with mild ABP who underwent IOC during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Factors assessed included preoperative size of the CBD on ultrasonography, presence of stones in the gallbladder and the CBD, and IOC results. For the statistical analysis, χ(2) or Fisher's exact tests to compare proportions and the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test for analysis of values with abnormal distribution were used. The study included 113 patients, 82 males (72.6%) and 31 females (27.4%), of mean age 46.9 ± 14.7 years (range 18-86 years). All preoperative laboratory indicators were elevated. The group of the patients with stones in the CBD diagnosed by IOC was divided in patients with diameters <0.8 mm and with diameters ≥0.8 mm of the CBD diagnosed preoperatively with ultrasound. The laboratory tests do not demonstrate difference statistically significative between these two groups. The group of the patients without stones in the CBD diagnosed by IOC was also divided in patients with diameters <0.8 mm and with diameters ≥0.8 mm of the CBD. Also in these two groups, the statistical analysis of the laboratory tests does not demonstrate significative difference. Most procedures were performed by specialists (64.6%), and all patients underwent IOC. IOC showed stones in 84/113 patients (74.3%). A comparison of patients with and without stones at IOC showed similar mean times from hospitalization to surgery (5.9 days [range 2-12 days] vs. 6.1 days [range 2-23 days]), from surgery until hospital discharge (2.0 days [range 0-4 days] vs. 2.2 days [range 0-11 days]), and overall length of stay (7.9 days [range 3-19 days] vs. 8.3 days [range 3-23 days]) (P > 0.001). IOC is useful to diagnose residual CBD stones, without increasing complications related to the procedure itself.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 24%
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Student > Postgraduate 6 15%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,887,790
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#370
of 550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,922
of 310,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.