The HAC Trial (Harmonic for Acute Cholecystitis) Study. Randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of Harmonic(H) versus Monopolar Diathermy (M) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis (AC) in adults

Trials

Volumn 10, Issue , 2009, Pages

  Catena, Fausto ^a   Ansaloni, Luca ^a   Di Saverio, Salomone ^a   Gazzotti, Filippo ^a   Coccolini, Federico ^a   Pinna, Antonio Daniele ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE CHOLECYSTITIS; ADULT; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CHOLECYSTECTOMY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMORBIDITY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DIATHERMY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; EARLY INTERVENTION; ECHOGRAPHY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MONOPOLAR DIATHERMY; MORBIDITY; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCALPEL; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TROCAR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTROCOAGULATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL INSTRUMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ULTRASOUND;

ADULT; CHOLECYSTECTOMY, LAPAROSCOPIC; CHOLECYSTITIS, ACUTE; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; ELECTROCOAGULATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RESEARCH DESIGN; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ULTRASONICS;

EID: 67649655747     PISSN: 17456215     EISSN: 17456215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-34     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Rai R Sinha A Rai S Randomized clinical trial of open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis (Br J Surg 2005; 92: 44-49) Br J Surg 2005, 92(4):494. 10.1002/bjs.5042 15782391
2. Nuzzo G Giuliante F Persiani R The risk of biliary ductal injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy J Chir (Paris) 2004, 141(6):343-53. 15738842
3. Johansson M Thune A Nelvin L Stiernstam M Westman B Lundell L Randomized clinical trial of open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis Br J Surg 2005, 92(1):44-9. 10.1002/ bjs.4836 15584058
4. Asoglu O Ozmen V Karanlik H Igci A Kecer M Parlak M Unal ES Does the complication rate increase in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2004, 14(2):81-6. 10.1089/ 109264204322973844 15107216
5. Johansson M Thune A Blomqvist A Nelvin L Lundell L Management of acute cholecystitis in the laparoscopic era: Results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial J Gastrointest Surg 2003, 7(5):642-5. 10.1016/ S1091-255X(03)00065-9 12850677
6. Hüscher CG Lirici MM Di Paola M Crafa F Napolitano C Mereu A Recher A Corradi A Amini M Laparoscopic cholecystectomy by ultrasonic dissection without cystic duct and artery ligature Surg Endosc 2003, 17(3):442-51. 10.1007/s00464-002-9068-3 12399846
7. Schulz K Assessing Allocation Concealment and Blinding in Randomised Controlled Trials: Why bother? Evid Based Nurs 2001, 4:4-6. 10.1136/ ebn.4.1.4 11707879
8. Lachin JM Properties of simple randomization in clinical trials Control Clin Trials 1988, 9(4):312-26. 10.1016/0197-2456(88)90046-3 3203523
9. Altman DG Schulz KF Statistics notes: Concealing treatment allocation in randomised trials British Medical Journal 2001, 323(7310):446-7. 1121039 11520850 10.1136/bmj.323.7310.446
10. Schulz KF Randomised trials, human nature, and reporting guidelines Lancet 1996, 348(9027):596-8. 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)01201-9 8774577
11. Chalmers I Comparing like with like: Some historical milestones in the evolution of methods to create unbiased comparison groups in therapeutic experiments Int J Epidemiol 2001, 30(5):1156-64. 10.1093/ije/30.5.1156 11689539
12. Roberts C Torgerson D Baseline imbalance in randomised controlled trials British Medical Journal 1999, 319(7203):185. 1116277 10406763
13. Schulz K Chalmers I Hayes R Altman D Empirical evidence of bias dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials JAMA 1995, 273(5):408-12. 10.1001/ jama.273.5.408 7823387