Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25177128›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of surgery2014

Stepwise approach to laparoscopic appendicectomy in children.

Anisha Sarkar, Joselito Tantoco, Chris Kimber, Yves Heloury, Peter Ferguson, Wei Cheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Anisha SarkarSouthern Health, Melbourne, Australia ; Level 5, Block E, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3168 Australia.
Joselito TantocoDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia.
Chris KimberDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia.
Yves HelouryDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia.
Peter FergusonDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia.
Wei ChengDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, three ports are used in laparoscopic appendicectomy. However to reduce surgical incision and cost, it is feasible to remove the appendix using fewer ports. In this study, we compared the efficacy of stepwise and standard approach in laparoscopic appendicectomies in children. Between August 2008 and September 2010, 378 children with appendicitis were allotted to either the stepwise or standard laparoscopy group depending on the operating surgeon's preference. In the former group, an operating telescope was inserted first. The number of ports used was based on the pathology (stepwise approach). In the latter group, three ports were inserted in all patients (standard approach). The two groups were similar. In the stepwise group, we performed 95 single port (utilising a scope with an instrument channel), 37 two ports and 13 three ports appendicectomies. In the stepwise group, operating time was shorter (not yet statistically significant) and it reduced the port numbers by more than 50 %. The stepwise approach provides an evidence-based management of appendicitis with comparable outcomes. This procedure further reduces incision trauma, operating times and the cost of operation. However, the reduction of post-operative analgesic requirement needs further study.

Indexed as

AppendicectomyChildrenLaparoscopyStandardStepwise

Identifiers

PMID25177128
PMCPMC4141058

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.