Risk Factors Associated with Conversion of Laparoscopic to Open Cholecystectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Background: Gallstones disease is one of the major problem of gastro intestinal tract and surgical removal is usually advised. Surgery is usually laparoscopic but if the dissection is tedious, laparoscopic procedure can be converted into open procedure. Objective: This study aims to assess the reasons and risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) into open cholecystectomy (OC). Materials and Methods: A prospective assessment of medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy at ward-2, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre from January 2019 to December 2021 was undertaken to identify indications of all laparoscopic cholecystectomies converted to open cholecystectomy and assess operative time and length of hospital stay of these patients. Results: A total of 984 elective cholecystectomies were performed in which 85.5% (n=841) were females and 14.5% (n=143) were males. Male to female ratio was 1:5.8 with conversion rate 0.40 % (n=04) and 4.36% (n=43) respectively. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was done in 95.22% (n=937) cases while 4.78% (n=47) patients required conversion to open cholecystectomy with major pre-operative risk factors being acute cholecystitis (p<0.001), history of acute cholecystitis (p=0.012), history of acute pancreatitis (p=0.007), history of previous open surgery (p<0.001) and major per-operative risk factors being severe bleeding (p<0.001), dense adhesions (p=0.755), distorted anatomy (p<0.001), visceral damage (p<0.001) and biliary injury(p<0.001). Conclusion: We have identified some important risk factors for the conversion of surgical approach for acute cholecystitis. However, the open approach should be done by experienced surgeons when necessary. The overall impact of the study is to identify the patients who are the risk of conversion into open preoperatively so that proper arrangement and counseling should be done.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".