ArticleSurgery today2012
Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a single centre experience.
Article in Surgery today, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions to optimize recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Pooled it
- Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgery today · 2015Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies: a meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Pooled it
- Surgical Site Infection Following Single-Port Appendectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Single-incision laparoscopic management of a giant hepatic cyst.Journal of surgical case reports · 2015Article
- Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy in children: Clinical and surgical outcomes.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2014Review
- Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: an analysis of outcomes at a single institution.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology · 2012Article
- Single-site Nissen fundoplication versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the short-term outcomes of single-incision and conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) at a single surgical unit.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study comparing the operative outcomes of two LA techniques between January 2009 and November 2010.
resultsLA was performed successfully in 44 patients: through a single incision in 27 patients and through three incisions in 17 patients. The time taken to resume oral intake was slightly less in the single-incision group than in the three-incision group, at 1.1 versus 1.5 days, respectively (P = 0.0419). However, blood loss and hospital stay were not significantly different, at 7.2 versus 6.4 ml (P = 0.6244) and 3.7 versus 3.8 days (P = 0.8565), respectively. The cosmetic result was better in the single-incision group, because of the well-concealed scar.
conclusionBoth single-incision and conventional LA are effective and minimally invasive, and should be performed according to the experience of the surgeon. Single-incision LA results in faster recovery, but larger studies are required to confirm this and to determine if these techniques can be used safely for all indications of appendectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22218872What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.