ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery
Comparison of single port and three port laparoscopic splenectomy in patients with immune thrombocytopenic purpura: Clinical comparative study.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Single incision laparoscopic abdominal surgeries: case series of 155 various procedures, an observational cohort study.Turkish journal of surgery · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic splenectomy: Current concepts.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2017Review
- Role of Laparoscopic Splenectomy in Elderly Immune Thrombocytopenia.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2016Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic splenectomy.Journal of minimal access surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimSingle-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has become increasingly popular during the last decades. This prospective study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of single-port laparoscopic splenectomy compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic splenectomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween February 2, 2009 and August 29, 2011, a total of 40 patients with the diagnosis of immune thrombocytopenic purpura were included to study. Patients were alienated into two groups according to the procedure type including SILS and conventional multiport splenectomy.
resultsThere were 19 patients in group 1, and 21 in group 2. Operative time was significantly shorter in group 1 versus group 2 (112.4 ± 13.56 vs 71.2 ±18.1 minutes, respectively, P < 0.05). One patient in group 1 had converted to laparatomy due to preoperative bleeding. Postoperative pain analyses (VAS Score) revealed superiority of SILS in the early post-operative days (P < 0.05).
conclusionsSILS splenectomy is a safe and effective alternative to standard laparoscopic splenectomy.
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.