Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22538676›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2012

Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for colonic neoplasm: a randomized, controlled trial.

Jensen T C Poon, Chi-Wai Cheung, Joe K M Fan, Oswen S H Lo, Wai-Lun Law

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
19.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

99 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 218 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Short-Term Outcomes of Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Prospective Evidence.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery-systematic review and pooled analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jensen T C PoonDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Chi-Wai Cheung
Joe K M Fan
Oswen S H Lo
Wai-Lun Law
University of Hong Kong · HKQueen Mary Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) is a newly developed procedure with the benefit of better cosmetic outcome and potentially reduced wound pain compared with conventionally laparoscopic colectomy (CLC). However, the application of SILC requires careful evaluation to prove its benefit and safety. This randomized, controlled study compared the operative outcome of patients who underwent SILC and CLC.

methodsPatients who had small cancer (<4 cm) or adenomatous polyp requiring colectomy were randomized to have SILC or CLC. The patients were blinded to the procedures and the postoperative pain was used as the primary outcome measure. All patients had patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine after the operation and the nominal rating score on days 1-3 and day 14 were recorded by research staff, who did not known the types of operations. Other operative outcomes of the two groups of patients also were recorded prospectively and compared.

resultsThere were 25 patients in each group. The patients' demographics, tumor characteristics, operating time, blood loss, complication rate, number of lymph nodes harvested, and resection margin have no statistically significant difference between the two groups. There was no operative mortality in both groups. The SILC group had consistently lower median pain score than CLC group in the whole postoperative course and the difference was statistically significant on day 1 (0 (0-5) vs. day 3 (0-6) respectively; p = 0.002) and day 2 (0 (0-3) vs. 2 (0-8) respectively; p = 0.014). The median hospital stay in the SILC group also was shorter the CLC group.

conclusionsIn a selected group of patients with small tumor and good operative risk, SILC is a safe alternative to CLC. Single-port laparoscopic colectomy also is associated with the benefits of less postoperative pain and shorter hospital stay than CLC.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overColectomyColonic NeoplasmsElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22538676
OpenAlexW1969431092

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.