Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21887555›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2011

Single incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a single surgeon experience of 102 consecutive cases.

D Geisler, T Garrett

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Laparoscopy adjuvant total colorectal resection for the treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Effect of BMI on Short-Term Outcomes with Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: a Case-Matched Study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. SILS v SILS+1: a Case-Matched Comparison for Colorectal Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015
    Article
  13. Single-Incision Laparoscopic Colon and Rectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Single-port laparoscopic colectomy.Techniques in coloproctology · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

D GeislerWest Penn Allegheny Health System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. dgeisler@ma.rr.com
T Garrett
Allegheny Health Network · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the recent heightened interest in even less invasive surgery, single port laparoscopic colorectal surgery is quickly gaining acceptance. While this access technique was first described in 2007 for colorectal resective procedures, large series are lacking.

methodsBetween January 2009 and October 2010, all patients undergoing single port colorectal surgery performed by a single surgeon were prospectively entered into an IRB-approved database and studied with regard to perioperative events, morbidity, and mortality.

resultsOne hundred and two consecutive patients underwent a single port colorectal procedure. Mean age was 47 years (9-93 years), and average body mass index was 26 kg/m(2) (15-39 kg/m(2)). Primary diagnoses included ulcerative colitis (51), neoplasia (23), Crohn's disease (14), diverticulitis (11), familial adenomatous polyposis (1), and other (2). Procedures included 23 total colectomies, 40 segmental colectomies, and 19 other procedures. There was 1 conversion to an open operation, and 18 (18%) patients required placement of additional ports (1 port: N = 13; 2 ports: N = 2; 3 ports: N = 3). Average operating room time was 99 min (13-245), mean length of incision was 3.7 cm (1.2-7.8 cm), and average estimated blood loss was 140 ml (0-750 ml). There was one postoperative death, and 39 (38%) patients experienced minor postoperative complications. Mean lymph node harvest for oncologic resections was 44 (14-142). The average length of hospital stay was 5.9 days (2-24 days).

conclusionsWith proper patient selection and laparoscopic experience, single port colorectal surgery can be performed for even the most complex colorectal procedures. Further studies are needed to assess the benefits that single port colorectal surgery has over a conventional laparoscopic approach.

Indexed as

LaparoscopesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildColonic DiseasesColorectal SurgeryEquipment DesignFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceLaparoscopyMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID21887555
OpenAlexW1971167206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.