Skip to main content
. 2018 Sep 27;10(6):57–69. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v10.i6.57

Table 3.

Clinical outcomes of included comparative studies

Study, year, country No. of patients Leakage of the cystic duct Bile duct injury Biloma Intra-abdominal abcess
Harmonic scalpel/shears vs metal clips
Wills[22], 2013, United States 57 vs 148 1 vs 1 1 (D) vs 0 1 vs 0 0 vs 0
Wu[26], 2011, China 100 vs 100 0 vs 1 0 vs 0 0 vs 0 0 vs 0
Redwan[13], 2010, Egypt 80 vs 80 0 vs 1 0 vs 0 0 vs 0 0 vs 0
Kandil[14], 2010, Egypt 70 vs 70 0 vs 1 0 vs 0 NR NR
Gelmini[23], 2010, Italy 95 vs 90 0 vs 0 0 vs 0 NR 2 vs 0
Bessa[15], 2008, Egypt 60 vs 60 0 vs 0 0 vs 0 NR NR
Locking absorbable vs locking non-absorbable clips
Yang[21], 2014, China 635 vs 728 0 vs 7 NR NR 1 vs 2
Locking vs non-locking clips
Matsui[20], 2012, Japan 907 vs 110 0 vs 0 NR NR NR
Rohatgi[24], 2006, United Kingdom 344 vs 146 0 vs 3 NR 2 vs 2 NR
Yano[25], 2003, Japan 328 vs 444 1 vs 2 2 vs 4 (severity not reported) NR NR
Other
Singal[19], 2018, India 70 silk ligature vs 70 titanium clips 0 vs 0 NR NR NR
Schulze[17], 2010, Denmark 101 Ligasure vs 113 titanium clips 0 vs 0 0 vs 0 NR NR
Seenu[16], 2004, India 53 absorbable ligature vs 52 titanium clips 2 vs 2 NR NR NR
Hüscher[18], 2003, Italy 331 harmonic shears vs 130 harmonic shears + endoloop 7 vs 3 1 (D) vs 0 NR 0 vs 1

Amsterdam classification was used to identify the severity of the bile duct injuries: B: Major bile duct leaks with or without concomitant biliary strictures; C: Bile duct strictures without bile leakage; D: Complete transection of the duct with or without excision of some portion of the biliary tree.