ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2015
Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A non-randomized, age-matched single center trial.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06314399 (Predictive Factors Associated with Bile Culture Positivity and PhenotypiCal AntIbiogram Resistance Patterns in Patients Taken to LaparOscopic Cholecystectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Predictive Factors Associated with Bile Culture Positivity and PhenotypiCal AntIbiogram Resistance Patterns in Patients Taken to LaparOscopic Cholecystectomy (BACILO): a Protocol for a Prediction Model Study
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robot-assisted vs. laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children: a meta-analysis with systematic review of comparative studies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Readmission to hospital following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2020Pooled it
- Review
- Article
- Single-Incision Combined Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy and Cholecystectomy: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
- A Comparative Study of Needlescopic Grasper Assisted Single Incision versus Three-Port versus Pure Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2019Article
- Single center cost analysis of single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgical treatment in colorectal malignant diseases.International journal of colorectal disease · 2017Article
- New advantageous tool in single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the needle grasper.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the safety of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomies with standard four-port cholecystectomies.
methodsBetween January 2011 and December 2012 datas were gathered from 100 consecutive patients who received a single-port cholecystectomy. Patient baseline characteristics of all 100 single-port cholecystectomies were collected (body mass index, age, etc.) in a database. This group was compared with 100 age-matched patients who underwent a conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same period. Retrospectively, per- and postoperative data were added. The two groups were compared to each other using independent t-tests and χ(2)-tests, P values below 0.05 were considered significantly different.
resultsNo differences were found between both groups regarding baseline characteristics. Operating time was significantly shorter in the total single-port group (42 min vs 62 min, P < 0.05); in procedures performed by surgeons the same trend was seen (45 min vs 59 min, P < 0.05). Peroperative complications between both groups were equal (3 in the single-port group vs 5 in the multiport group; P = 0.42). Although not significant less postoperative complications were seen in the single-port group compared with the multiport group (3 vs 9; P = 0.07). No statistically significant differences were found between both groups with regard to length of hospital stay, readmissions and mortality.
conclusionSingle-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has the potential to be a safe technique with a low complication rate, short in-hospital stay and comparable operating time. Single-port cholecystectomy provides the patient an almost non-visible scar while preserving optimal quality of surgery. Further prospective studies are needed to prove the safety of the single-port technique.
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.