ArticleThe Indian journal of surgery2015
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Complications in Transvaginal Approach in Laparoscopic Surgery.
Article in The Indian journal of surgery, 2015. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic literature review and (network) meta-analysis of the effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus aminoglycosides/polymyxins and ceftazidime/avibactam for treating adult patients with multidrug-resistantAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Pooled it
- Global Prevalence of Varicella-Associated Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transvaginal access is the most popular natural orifice translumenal technique in the minimally invasive surgery. Reviews on non-gynecological transvaginal approach morbidities reveal that rates vary greatly. A systematic review of transvaginal approach in non-gynecological intraabdominal procedures was carried out to assess the risk of complications. A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from the inception of these databases to March 2012. The following keywords were searched: "transvaginal", "NOTES", "single incision", and "single port". From the total of 231 potentially eligible abstracts, 87 papers were retrieved and evaluated as fulfilling the eligibility criteria. The final analysis included 32 articles. The overall complications rate was 4.4 %, and complications related to the transvaginal port reached 2.4 %. Conversion rate to open surgery was 3.4 %. The incidence of postoperative urinary tract infection was 0.8 %. The mean operative time was 119 min. The mean hospital stay was 3.1 days (range 6 h-12 days). The technique of transvaginal access can offer several advantages for a patient and is associated with an acceptable rate of complications.
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.