ArticleUlusal cerrahi dergisi2016
Prospective randomized comparison of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with new facilitating maneuver vs. conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Ulusal cerrahi dergisi, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Single-incision surgery trocar-site hernia: an updated systematic review meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis by the Minimally Invasive Surgery Synthesis of Interventions Outcomes Network (MISSION).Surgical endoscopy · 2018Pooled it
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with two mini cosmetic incisions.Updates in surgery · 2018Trial
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
objectiveWe aimed to investigate the technical feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) with our new facilitative maneuver and to compare it with the gold standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). MATERIAL AND
methodsOperation time, cosmetic score and incisional hernia rates between LC (n=20) and SILC-1 (first 20 consecutive operations with the new technique) and 2 (subsequent 20 operations with the new technique) were compared.
resultsThe median operation time for LC, SILC-1 and SILC-2 were; 35 min (12-75), 47.5 min (30-70), and 30 min (12-80), respectively (p=0.005). The operation duration was similar in LC and SILC-2 (p=0.277) groups. Wound seroma rate was higher in SILC-1 (45%) and SILC-2 (30%) groups than LC (5%) group (p=0.010). Cosmetic score was similar between all the groups. Hernia rates were 15.8% and 5.3% in the SILC-1 and SILC-2 groups, respectively, while there was no hernia in the LC group.
conclusionSILC with new facilitating maneuver is comparable with classical four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in terms of ease, operation time, reproducibility and safety. Besides these advantages, the single-incision access technique must be optimized to provide comparable wound complication and postoperative hernia rates before being recommended to patients.
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.