Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22890606›Full record

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

Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis.

Hiroshi Ohtani, Yutaka Tamamori, Yuichi Arimoto, Yukio Nishiguchi, Kiyoshi Maeda, Kosei Hirakawa

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
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 68 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
9.3field-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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Laparoscopic Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease Has Better Outcomes Than Open Repair.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Observational

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hiroshi OhtaniDepartment of Surgery, Osaka City Sumiyoshi Hospital, 1-2-16, Higashi-Kagaya, Suminoe-ku, Osaka, 559-0012, Japan. m5051923@msic.med.osaka-cu.ac.jp
Yutaka Tamamori
Yuichi Arimoto
Yukio Nishiguchi
Kiyoshi Maeda
Kosei Hirakawa
Osaka City University · JPOsaka City General Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of patients with acute appendicitis.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for relevant papers published between January 1990 and February 2012. We analyzed 22 outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis.

resultsWe identified 39 papers reporting results from randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for acute appendicitis. Our meta-analysis included 5,896 patients with acute appendicitis; 2,847 had undergone laparoscopic surgery, and 3,049 had undergone open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with longer operative time (by 13.12 min). However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis was associated with earlier resumption of liquid and solid intake; shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay; a reduction in dose numbers of parenteral and oral analgesics; earlier return to normal activity, work, and normal life; decreased occurrence of wound infection; a better cosmesis; and similar hospital charges.

conclusionsLaparoscopic surgery may now be the standard treatment for acute appendicitis.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAcute DiseaseAppendectomyAppendicitisCicatrixHospital ChargesHumansLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22890606
OpenAlexW2054725081

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.