ArticleMinimally invasive surgery2013
Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for cancer: short-term outcomes and comparative analysis.
Article in Minimally invasive surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Guideline
- Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic colectomy and multiport laparoscopic colectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery-systematic review and pooled analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Pooled it
- Single-incision Laparoscopic Colonic Surgery: A Systemic Review, Meta-analysis, and Future Prospect.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2024Review
- Two-port laparoscopic anterior resection through a self-made glove device versus conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparison of short-term surgical results.World journal of surgical oncology · 2016Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016Article
- Review of 500 single incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery cases - Lessons learned.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Shifting Paradigms in Minimally Invasive Surgery: Applications of Transanal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015Review
- Analysis of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) right colectomy reveals a minimal learning curve.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- Overview of single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancers: past, present, and the future.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction. Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) is a viable and safe technique; however, there are no single-institution studies comparing outcomes of SILC for colon cancer with well-established minimally invasive techniques. We evaluated the short-term outcomes following SILC for cancer compared to a group of well-established minimally invasive techniques. Methods. Fifty consecutive patients who underwent SILC for colon cancer were compared to a control group composed of 50 cases of minimally invasive colectomies performed with either conventional multiport or hand-assisted laparoscopic technique. The groups were paired based on the type of procedure. Demographics, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. Results. With the exception of BMI, demographics were similar between both groups. Most of the procedures were right colectomies (n = 33) and anterior resections (n = 12). There were no significant differences in operative time (127.9 versus 126.7 min), conversions (0 versus 1), complications (14% versus 8%), length of stay (4.5 versus 4.0 days), readmissions (2% versus 2%), and reoperations (2% versus 2%). Oncological outcomes were also similar between groups. Conclusions. SILC is an oncologically sound alternative for the management of colon cancer and results in similar short-term outcomes as compared with well-established minimally invasive techniques.
Identifiers
What 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.