MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117453479 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znaf270.316

118 The Rolling Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Management of Gallstone Ileus

2025· article· en· W7117453479 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deelan Vadher, Adele Zacken, Viraj Shah, Mohamad Silmi, Luis Aguilar, Kejal Patel, Murtuza Aliasgar Calcuttawala, Poyyamozhi Rajagopal

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiliary and Gastrointestinal Fistulas
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGallstone ileusGallstonesMEDLINECholecystectomyOdds ratioFistulaSystematic reviewProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Gallstone ileus is a rare but serious complication caused by gallstones entering the gastrointestinal tract, often necessitating surgical intervention. Surgical options include enterolithotomy alone, enterolithotomy combined with cholecystectomy, and enterolithotomy with fistula closure. However, there is no consensus on which approach yields the best outcomes regarding mortality, morbidity, and operative time. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare these surgical strategies. Method Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was performed across Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed for studies published after 2000. Two reviewers independently screened eligible studies and extracted relevant data. Study quality was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Ten studies including 293 patients were included. Primary outcomes analysed were mortality and morbidity; secondary outcome was operative time. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated using fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using I² and τ² statistics. Subgroup analyses explored differences among surgical approaches. Results Combined enterolithotomy and cholecystectomy was associated with significantly lower mortality (OR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.87–3.04; I² = 33%) compared to enterolithotomy alone (OR: 3.09; 95% CI: 1.36–7.02; I² = 69%). Enterolithotomy with fistula repair demonstrated the highest morbidity risk (OR: 4.92; 95% CI: 3.38–7.14; I² = 0%). Operative time was significantly longer for combined procedures (MD: 62.47 minutes; 95% CI: 60.14–64.81). Subgroup differences were statistically significant (p < 0.01). Conclusions Enterolithotomy combined with cholecystectomy may improve mortality despite increased operative duration. These findings support tailored surgical approaches and highlight the need for prospective studies to determine optimal management.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.039
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicBiliary and Gastrointestinal FistulasFrench-language works237,207