Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22828958›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2013

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy: a meta-analysis of comparative studies.

Timothy X Yang, Terence C Chua

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. 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
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Cosmesis and Body Image After Robotic Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Timothy X YangHepatobiliary and Surgical Oncology Unit, UNSW Department of Surgery, St George Hospital, Kogarah, Sydney, NSW 2217, Australia.
Terence C Chua

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to compare single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) to conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC).

backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a minimally invasive technique being recently applied to colorectal surgery. A number of studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC have recently been published.

methodsA literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases for studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC was conducted. The primary outcome measures for meta-analysis were postoperative complications, length of stay, and operative time. Secondary outcome measures were incision length, estimated blood loss, and number of lymph nodes harvested.

resultsFifteen studies comparing 467 patients undergoing SILC to 539 patients undergoing conventional MLC were reviewed and the data pooled for analysis. Patients undergoing SILC had a shorter length of stay (pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.68; 95 % CI = -1.20 to -0.16; p = 0.0099), shorter incision length (pooled WMD = -1.37; 95 % CI = -2.74 to 0.000199; p = 0.05), less estimated blood loss (pooled WMD = -20.25; 95 % CI = -39.25 to -1.24; p = 0.037), and more lymph nodes harvested (pooled WMD = 1.75; 95 % CI = 0.12 to 3.38; p = 0.035), while there was no significant difference in the number of postoperative complications (pooled odds ratio = 0.83; 95 % CI = 0.57 to 1.20; p = 0.33) or operative time (pooled WMD = 5.06; 95 % CI = -2.91 to 13.03; p = 0.21).

conclusionSILC appears to have comparable results to conventional MLC in the hands of experienced surgeons. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to define the relative benefits of one procedure over the other.

Indexed as

Blood Loss, SurgicalColectomyColonic DiseasesHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22828958

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.