Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2013
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery in children: a randomized control trial of acute appendicitis.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 19 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 19 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for the risk of incisional hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Updates in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of single-incision versus three-port laparoscopic appendectomy comparing operation time and postoperative pain.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for suspected uncomplicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for suspected uncomplicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Single-incision compared with conventional laparoscopy for appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Pooled it
- Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port approach for acute appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2021Pooled it
- Incidence of incisional hernias following single-incision versus traditional laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Laparoscopic entry techniques.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions to optimize recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Pooled it
- Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgery today · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2015Pooled it
- Single-incision versus three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing single incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.World journal of surgery · 2014Pooled it
- 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 · 2014Pooled it
- Comparison between single-incision and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis from eight RCTs.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Pooled it
- Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies: a meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Pooled it
- Single-site laparoscopic appendectomy in children using conventional instruments: a prospective, randomized, control trial.Pediatric surgery international · 2015Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a novel area of minimally invasive surgery that uses a single incision to minimize all ports to one site. The end result is an incision that can be strategically placed in the umbilicus for a perceived scarless abdomen. The authors rationalized that a randomized controlled trial was important given the rapid popularization of this approach.
methodsAn institutional review board-approved prospective randomized trial compared patients undergoing SILS (SILS-A) and conventional laparoscopic (LAP-A) appendectomy at a free-standing children's hospital during a median follow-up period of 2.2 years.
resultsA total of 50 patients (50 % boys and 67 % Hispanics) were randomized equally to SILS-A and LAP-A. The patients ranged in age from 3 to 15 years without a difference between the two groups. Half (50 %) of these patients were younger than 8 years. The technique for SILS-A involved a single supraumbilical curvilinear skin incision with three fascial incisions. Ports were inserted to varying depths to minimize restriction of instrument movement. Coaxial visualization was improved by the use of a 30° scope. To achieve technical comparability with the LAP-A, a stapler device was used, which required upsizing a 5 mm port to a 12 mm port. The mean duration of the operation was 46.8 ± 3.7 min (range, 22-120 min) compared with 34.8 ± 2.5 min (range, 18-77 min) for standard LAP-A (p = 0.010). No conversions occurred, and the two groups did not differ in hospital length of stay. The postoperative complications consisted of one wound seroma in the SILS-A group (nonsignificant difference), and no hernias were seen. No difference in readmissions, diet tolerance, fever, or postoperative pain was noted between the two groups.
conclusionsThe findings show the SILS approach to be feasible in the pediatric population despite the limited abdominal domain in younger children. Although SILS operating room times currently are longer than for LAP-A, they are comparable, and no other outcomes differed appreciably between the two techniques at the time of hospitalization or during the follow-up period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23239295What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.