ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015
Single-port laparoscopic colorectal surgery shows equivalent or better outcomes to standard laparoscopic surgery: results of a 190-patient, 7-criterion case-match study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Guideline
- Trial
- Single-portAnnals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- rSILS: initial clinical experience with single-port robotic (SPr) right colectomy.Techniques in coloproctology · 2020Article
- Single-port robotic left colectomy: first clinical experience using the SP robot (rSILS).Techniques in coloproctology · 2020Article
- Feasibility of single-port retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy in dogs.Veterinary surgery : VS · 2018Article
- The single-incision laparoscopic surgery technique has questionable advantages in colorectal surgery.Innovative surgical sciences · 2018Article
- Needlescopic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer ~a comparative study~.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2017Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.Visceral medicine · 2016Review
- Short-term and long-term outcomes of single-incision versus multi-incision laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer: a propensity-score-matched analysis of 214 cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for diverticulitis in overweight patients.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2015Article
- Clinical significance of single-port laparoscopic splenectomy: comparison of single-port and multiport laparoscopic procedure.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2015Article
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
introductionSingle-port (SP) surgery has been characterized as having limited applicability regarding procedure, disease, and patient characteristics. There is a question if SP procedures offer disadvantages or advantages to multiport (MP) colorectal surgery. We hypothesize that SP is equivalent to MP and is a safe alternative in the full spectrum of colorectal disease and procedures.
methodsA case-matched analysis of a prospectively maintained database to compare perioperative outcomes in SP versus MP was performed. Criteria included age, gender, BMI, previous abdominal surgery, previous XRT, disease process, and procedure. 95 exact matches for all 7 criteria were found between 159 SP and 1,617 MP cases. Perioperative outcomes, surgical technique, morbidity, mortality, local recurrence, and 5-year survival were analyzed.
resultsThere was lower mean EBL in SP but no difference in transfusion requirement. OR time for SP left colectomy was shorter, with a trend to shorter OR times found in all procedures. 99 % SP and 98 % MP had no intra-operative complications. Conversion to open was equivalent (0/1). Mean largest incision was smaller for SP. There were no differences in return of bowel function or length of hospital stay. There were no mortalities. There were no differences in perioperative morbidity, local recurrence, distant metastasis, or overall 5-year survival.
conclusionsSP is a safe alternative to MP colorectal surgery across the full array of procedures in equivalent patients. This study demonstrates SP has less blood loss, smaller incisions, is quicker in left colectomy, and tends to be quicker across all procedures. Conversion and morbidity rates are equivalent to MP, without compromise in quality of surgical technique. While proper training is essential, concerns regarding the inability to use SP laparoscopic colorectal surgery safely are unfounded in nearly exactly matched patients. These issues will require further study as SP laparoscopic colorectal surgery is practiced more widely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25277473What 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.