Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23052510›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013

Single incision versus reduced port splenectomy--searching for the best alternative to conventional laparoscopic splenectomy.

Julio Lopez Monclova, Eduardo M Targarona, Pablo Vidal, Yerald Peraza, Francisco Garcia, Carlos Rodriguez Otero, Luis Pallares, Carmen Balague, Manuel Trias

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

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

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Single-incision laparoscopic splenectomy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Julio Lopez MonclovaDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mas Casanovas 90, 4th floor, 08041 Barcelona, Spain. juliocesar1701@hotmail.com
Eduardo M Targarona
Pablo Vidal
Yerald Peraza
Francisco Garcia
Carlos Rodriguez Otero
Luis Pallares
Carmen Balague
Manuel Trias

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is a well accepted approach for the treatment of multiple hematologic diseases. Single port access splenectomy (SPAS) emphasizes the concept of surgery through one small incision. The reduced port access splenectomy (RPAS) entails the use of fewer trocars of smaller sizes. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes after LS, SPAS, and RPAS, and to analyze the aesthetic result and patient satisfaction.

methodsWe included patients who underwent LS (group 1, n = 15), SPAS (group 2, n = 8), and RPAS (group 3, n = 10) between June 2008 and February 2012, whose final spleen weight was less of 500 g. The outcome parameters analyzed were operative time, need of additional trocars, blood loss, blood transfusion, weight of the spleen, postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay. To evaluate the cosmetic result, patients were asked to take the Body Image Questionnaire.

resultsPatients in group 3 were younger than group 1. Operative time was significantly longer in group 2 compared to groups 1 and 3 (83 ± 19 vs. 131 ± 43 vs. 81 ± 22 min, p = 0.01). There was no need to convert to open surgery in any group, nor were there differences in intra- or postoperative outcome. There were no differences between the groups in relation to the analgesic requirements. Twenty-two out of the 33 patients answered the questionnaire. There was a significant advantage in group 2 and 3 in the body image index with respect to group 1. There were no differences between groups 2 and 3 (7.3 ± 2.8 vs. 5.8 ± 1.3 vs. 5.1 ± 0.4, p < 0.02).

conclusionsRPAS is a good alternative to LS and SPAS. It improves the aesthetic results as compared to LS, whereas minimizes the technical challenges faced with SPAS.

Indexed as

AnalgesicsAnemia, Hemolytic, AutoimmuneBlood TransfusionBody ImageFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeOrgan SizePatient SatisfactionPostoperative PainProspective StudiesPurpura, Thrombocytopenic, IdiopathicAnalgesics

Identifiers

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.