Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22767084›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2012

Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC).

Adolfo Pisanu, Isabella Reccia, Giulia Porceddu, Alessandro Uccheddu

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
15.0field-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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Fewer-than-four ports versus four ports for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adolfo PisanuClinica Chirurgica, University of Cagliari, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Presidio Policlinico di Monserrato, Blocco G, SS 554 km 4,500, 09042 Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy. adolfo.pisanu@unica.it
Isabella Reccia
Giulia Porceddu
Alessandro Uccheddu
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Cagliari · ITUniversity of Cagliari · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has gained acceptance among surgeons as there is a trend to minimize the invasiveness of laparoscopy. The aim of this meta-analysis has been to assess the feasibility and safety of SILC when compared to conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC).

methodsA literature search for trials comparing SILC and CMLC was performed. Studies were reviewed for the outcomes of interest: patient characteristics; operative time and conversion rate; postoperative pain; length of hospital stay; postoperative complications; and patient satisfactory score (0-10). Standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated for continuous variables and odds ratio for qualitative variables.

resultsTwelve prospective randomized trials comparing SILC and CMLC were analyzed. Overall, 892 patients were randomized to either SILC (465) or CMLC (427). Operative time was significantly longer in SILC (63.0 vs. 45.8 min, SMD = 1.004, 95% CI = 0.434-1.573). Patient satisfactory score significantly favored SILC (8.2 vs. 7.2, SMD = -0.759, 95% CI = -1.064 to -0.455). No other difference was found.

conclusionsSILC is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated benign gallbladder disease with a significant patient satisfaction. New multicenter randomized trials are expected to evaluate SILC in more complex circumstances such as acute cholecystitis, previous abdominal surgery, and severe obesity.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiliary Tract DiseasesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22767084
OpenAlexW2024565972

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.