ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: long-term review from a single center.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of minimally invasive cholecystectomy: a narrative review.BMC surgery · 2024Review
- Routine single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with concomitant cholecystectomy for elderly patients: a 6-year retrospective comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Observational
- Analysis of post-operative complication in single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A retrospective analysis in 817 cases from a surgeon.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, researches about single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) are various, but long-term reviews assessing relevant complications after SILC with considerable amount of case series are rare. STUDY
designWe retrospectively reviewed a large series of 529 patients undergoing SILC to assess the long-term postoperative recovery, including postoperative complications, retained symptoms, and quality of life. Finally, we assessed its associated risk factors related to SILC patients' recovery in the long term.
resultsDuring a mean follow-up period of 36.8 ± 8.8 months after SILC, 402 (76.0 %) patients underwent complete resolution. Frequent diarrhea (12.1 %) and recurrent omphalitis (5.9 %) were most commonly seen among other complications and retained symptoms within overall the patients. We identified 1 (0.3 %) incision hernia and 1 (0.3 %) intra-abdominal abscess among overall the patients, while 3 (0.8 %) common bile duct stones and 1 (0.3 %) biliary pancreatitis among the patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis during long-term review period. No significant differences were identified between patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis and gallbladder polyps when considering other incidences (all p > 0.05). Patients undergoing SILC with older age (p = 0.023) or female gender (p = 0.020) contributed to complete resolution.
conclusionsSILC via traditional devices is feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative incidence rate in the long run. Patients with older age or female gender, who have no severe systemic diseases, tend to benefit more from the surgical intervention.
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.