| Title |
Single-stage management with combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-016-4918-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fujing Lv, Shutian Zhang, Ming Ji, Yongjun Wang, Peng Li, Wei Han |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to investigate the value of a single stage with combined tri-endoscopic (duodenoscopy, laparoscopy and choledochoscopy) approach for patients with concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Fifty-three patients with combined gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones from February 2014 to April 2015 were randomized assigned to two groups: 29 patients underwent single-stage surgery with combined duodenoscope, laparoscope and choledochoscope (combined tri-endoscopic group), and 29 patients underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy to remove common bile duct stones followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy several days later (control group). The success rate of complete stone removal, procedure-related complication, hospital stay and the cost of hospitalization were compared between the two groups. Altogether, 53 patients (29 patients in combined tri-endoscopic group and 24 patients in control group) successfully underwent the surgery and ERCP procedure. Three patients in the control group developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. One case of bile leaking and one case of residual stone were noted in the combined tri-endoscopic group. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to both complete stone removal [96.6 % (28/29) vs. 100 % (24/24)] and procedure-related complication rate [3.4 % (1/29) vs. 12.5 % (3/24)] (p > 0.05). No open surgery was required in either group. There were significant differences between the two groups with regard to hospital stay (6.72 ± 1.3 days vs. 10.91 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.01) and cost of hospitalization (15,724 ± 1613 CNY vs. 19,829 ± 2433 CNY, p < 0.05). The single-stage combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis was just as safe and successful as the control group. In addition, it resulted in a shorter hospital stay and less cost. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 50% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
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 30 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,323,943
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#5,659
of 6,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,378
of 299,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#112
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 299,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.