The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Common Bile Duct Injury During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and the Use of Intraoperative Cholangiography: Adverse Outcome or Preventable Error?
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Common bile duct (CBD) injury is a serious complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Predictors of this adverse outcome have not been well documented. HYPOTHESIS: Surgeon experience and the use of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) are associated with a decreased rate of major CBD injury during LC. DESIGN: A retrospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Washington State hospital discharge database reports from 1991 through 1998. PATIENTS: Discharge reports were searched for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, procedure codes consistent with LC and then evaluated for procedure codes for CBD repair and reconstruction within 90 days of LC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The rate of CBD injury in patients undergoing LC based on the surgeon's experience and IOC use. RESULTS: In all, 30 630 LCs and 76 major CBD injuries (2.5/1000 operations) were identified in this analysis. There were no significant differences between injured and noninjured patients in demographics, disease, payer status, or hospital variables. A CBD injury occurred in 3.2 of 1000 LCs in the early case order of surgeons compared with 1.7 per 1000 at later points (P = .01) (relative risk, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-2.88). The rate of injury in LCs performed without IOC was 3.3 per 1000 compared with 2.0 per 1000 in LCs with IOC (P = .02) (relative risk, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.6). Surgeon's experience and IOC use were independent predictors of injury. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of CBD injury is significantly lower when IOC is used. This effect is magnified during the early experience of surgeons. Systematic use of IOC may significantly reduce the rate of CBD injury.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Impact of gastric bypass operation on survival: a population-based analysis
Flum, D. R., & Dellinger, P. E. (2004) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.06.014 · Cited by 527
Self-citationWaage, A. (2006) · Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1001/archsurg.141.12.1207 · Cited by 314
Johansson, M., Thune, A., Blomqvist, A., Nelvin, L., & Lundell, L. (2003) · Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery · doi:10.1016/s1091-255x(03)00065-9 · Cited by 275
Brunt, L. M., Deziel, D. J., Telem, D. A., Strasberg, S. M., Aggarwal, R., Asbun, H., Bonjer, J., McDonald, M., Alseidi, A., Ujiki, M., et al. (2020) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000003791 · Cited by 268
Metadata
- Authors
- Flum, D. R.
- Venue
- Archives of Surgery
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2001-11-01
- Volume
- 136
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1287
- ISSN
- 0004-0010 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2154800391
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Common Bile Duct Injury During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and the Use of Intraoperative Cholangiography: Adverse Outcome or Preventable Error? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archsurg.136.11.1287
- The paper
- Flum, D. R. (2001). Common Bile Duct Injury During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and the Use of Intraoperative Cholangiography: Adverse Outcome or Preventable Error? Archives of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.136.11.1287
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.