ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology2026
Cystic duct anatomical variations and the risk of choledocholithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cystic duct anatomy is clinically significant for surgery and stone formation, yet the literature lacks a systematic analysis linking variations to common bile duct stones. This study investigated their prevalence and risk for choledocholithiasis. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus for studies on cystic duct morphology and choledocholithiasis. Pooled prevalence, risk ratios (RRs), and odds ratios were calculated using R; heterogeneity and bias were assessed via AQUA and Peter's tests. Results: High (17.2%) and posterior (13.8%) insertions were most prevalent. Factors significantly associated with choledocholithiasis included a long cystic duct (RR 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.90), low insertion (RR 1.46, 95%CI 1.06-1.76), spiral course (RR 1.41, 95%CI 1.06-1.86), and posterior insertion (RR 1.32, 95%CI 1.07-1.60). Lithiasis patients exhibited wider cysto-choledochal angles (47.1° vs. 40.8°). Geographic analysis revealed a high prevalence of low insertion in African populations (21.8%) and spiral ducts in East Asians. Conclusions: Cystic duct variations significantly increase susceptibility to choledocholithiasis and pose surgical challenges. As these complex anatomical courses and configurations are often missed, preoperative imaging is essential. Early identification enables safer surgical planning, reduces biliary injury risk, and can guide tailored strategies to prevent lithiasis in high-risk groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.