SynthesisPloS one2013
Single incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a current meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery through the umbilicus is associated with a higher incidence of trocar-site hernia than conventional laparoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2016Pooled it
- Cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and quality of life after da Vinci Single-Site cholecystectomy and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term results from a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Trial
- Single-port laparoscopic resection for diverticular disease: experiences with more than 300 consecutive patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Trial
- Randomized Trial of Immediate Postoperative Pain Following Single-incision Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Chinese medical journal · 2015Trial
- Outcomes and complications of three-incision versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Association of day-case rates with post COVID-19 recovery of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy activity across England.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2025Observational
- Observational
- A Comprehensive Analysis of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions.Cureus · 2024Review
- Robotic Surgery: Rediscovering Human Anatomy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- The effect of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy on systemic oxidative stress: a prospective clinical trial.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2017Article
- A Comparative Study of Single Incision versus Conventional Four Ports Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- A multicenter study of initial experience with single-incision robotic cholecystectomies (SIRC) demonstrating a high success rate in 465 cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review.World journal of methodology · 2015Article
- Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2015Article
- Do height and weight affect the feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- New minimally invasive approaches for cholecystectomy: Review of literature.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2015Review
- Postoperative complications following single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective analysis in 360 consecutive patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- Therapeutic advances: single incision laparoscopic hepatopancreatobiliary surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious meta-analyses that compared the outcome of SILC and CLC have not presented consistent conclusions. This meta-analysis was performed after adding many recent RCTs, to clarify this issue.
methodsRelevant articles published in English were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register from January 1997 to February 2013. Reference lists of the retrieved articles were reviewed to identify additional articles. Primary outcomes (postoperative pain scores, cosmetic score, and length of incision) and secondary outcomes (operating time, blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, time to initial oral intake, and time to resume work) were pooled. Quantitative variables were calculated using the weighted mean difference (WMD), and qualitative variables were pooled using odds ratios (OR).
results25 appropriate RCTs were identified from 2128 published articles. 1841 patients were treated, 944 with SILC and 897 with CLC. SILC was superior to CLC in cosmetic score (WMD = 1.155, P<0.001), shorter length of incision (WMD = -3.285, P = 0.029), and postoperative pain within 12 h (VAS in 3-4 h, WMD = -0.704, P = 0.026; VAS in 6-8 h, WMD = -0.613, P = 0.010). CLC was superior to SILC in operating time (OT) (WMD = 13.613, P<0.001) and need of additional instruments (OR = 7.448, P<0.001). Other secondary outcomes were similar.
conclusionsSILC offered a better cosmetic result and less postoperative pain for patients with uncomplicated cholelithiasis or polypoid lesions of the gallbladder. However, SILC was associated with a longer OT and required additional instruments.
Indexed as
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.