ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2013
Comparison of clinical outcomes of open, laparoscopic and single port appendicectomies.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Bayesian network meta-analysis of the effects of single-incision laparoscopic surgery, conventional laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAppendicectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed in general surgery. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open appendicectomy (OA), laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) and single port laparoscopic appendicectomy (SPLA).
methodsFifty consecutive patients with suspected acute appendicitis were studied (OA: n=20, LA: n=20, SPLA: n=10). Clinical outcomes were compared between the three groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and cost.
resultsPatient demographics were similar among groups (p>0.05). SPLA was characterised by longer operative time (88.1 minutes vs 35.6 minutes in OA and 33.4 minutes in LA) and higher costs (12.84 thousand Chinese yuan [RMB] vs 8.41 thousand RMB in LA and 4.99 thousand RMB in OA). OA was characterised by more blood loss (9.8ml vs 7.5ml in SPLA and 6.8ml in LA), longer hospital stay (7.5 days vs 3.5 days in LA and 3.4 days in SPLA) and lower costs. The total number of complications was higher for OA (n=2) than for LA and SPLA (n=0) although this was not statistically significant.
conclusionsWhere feasible, LA should be undertaken as the initial treatment of choice for most cases of suspected appendicitis.
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.