We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

Results: 3

1.
Figure 1

Figure 1. From: Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

Flow diagram of literature screening. ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; LC: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; LCBDE: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Jiong Lu, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2012 June 28;18(24):3156-3166.
2.
Figure 2

Figure 2. From: Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

Funnel plot of trials of stone clearance from the common bile duct. ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; LC: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; LCBDE: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. SE: Standard error; RD: Risk difference.

Jiong Lu, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2012 June 28;18(24):3156-3166.
3.
Figure 3

Figure 3. From: Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

Forest plot of meta-analysis. A: Two-stage [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)] vs single-stage [LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE)] in stone clearance from the common bile duct; B: Two-stage (ERCP/EST + LC) vs single-stage (LC + LCBDE) in postoperative morbidity; C: Two-stage (ERCP/EST + LC) vs single-stage (LC + LCBDE) in mortality; D: Two-stage (ERCP/EST + LC) vs single-stage (LC + LCBDE) in conversion to other procedures; E: Two-stage (ERCP/EST + LC) vs single-stage (LC + LCBDE) in length of hospital stay; F: Two-stage (ERCP/EST + LC) vs single-stage (LC + LCBDE) in total operating time. CI: Confidence interval.

Jiong Lu, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2012 June 28;18(24):3156-3166.

Supplemental Content

Recent activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...
Write to the Help Desk