ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2015
SILS v SILS+1: a Case-Matched Comparison for Colorectal Surgery.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Trial
- Advantages of the split-leg supine position single-port plus one laparoscopic surgery approach.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical application of two-port laparoscopic surgery in sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Natural orifice versus conventional mini-laparotomy for specimen extraction after reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: propensity score-matched comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- A learning curve in using organ retractor for single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Short- And medium-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with upper rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Cancer medicine · 2020Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic total colectomy using an organ retractor: A case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Feasibility of needlescopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safety and learning curve for Japanese Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System-unqualified young surgeons.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Review of 500 single incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery cases - Lessons learned.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is safe and feasible for benign and malignant colorectal diseases. SILS has comparable or improved outcomes compared to multiport laparoscopy but technical limitations when operating in the pelvis. To address these limitations, we developed an innovative SILS+1 approach using a single Pfannenstiel incision for pelvis access with one additional umbilical port. Our goal was to compare outcomes for SILS and SILS+1 in lower abdominal and pelvic colorectal surgery.
methodsReview of a prospectively maintained database identified patients who underwent an elective reduced port laparoscopic lower abdominal/pelvic colorectal procedure from 2009 to 2014. Cases were stratified by approach: SILS versus SILS+1 then matched 1:2 on age, gender, body mass index (BMI), comorbidity, and procedure. Demographic, perioperative, and postoperative outcome variables were evaluated. The main outcome measures were operative time, conversion rate, length of stay, complication, morbidity, and mortality rates.
resultsOne hundred thirty-two reduced port AR/LAR patients were evaluated-44 SILS and 88 SILS+1. The groups were similar in age, gender, BMI, and ASA class. The primary diagnosis in both cohorts was diverticulitis (90.9 % SILS, 87.5 % SILS+1), and main procedure performed an anterior rectosigmoidectomy (86.4 % SILS, 88.2 % SILS+1). Significantly more SILS+1 patients had previous abdominal surgery (p = 0.01). The operative time was significantly shorter in SILS+1 (mean 166.6 [SD 48.4] vs. 178.0 [SD 70.0], p = 0.03). The conversion rate to multiport or open surgery was also significantly lower with SILS+1 compared to SILS (1.1 vs. 11.4 %, p = 0.02). Postoperatively, the length of stay across the groups was similar. SILS trended towards higher complication and readmission rates (NS). There were no unplanned reoperations or mortality in either group.
conclusionsSILS+1 facilitates pelvic and lower abdominal colorectal surgery, with shorter operative times and lower conversion rates. The additional port improved visualization and outcomes without any impact on length of stay, readmission, or complication rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26282851What 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.