Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27142209›Full record

Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2016

Single-port versus conventional three-port laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial.

B J Choi, W J Jeong, I K Lee, S C Lee

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

B J ChoiDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Daeheung-ro 64, Jung-gu, Daejeon, 301-723, Republic of Korea.
W J JeongDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Daeheung-ro 64, Jung-gu, Daejeon, 301-723, Republic of Korea.
I K LeeDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
S C LeeDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Daeheung-ro 64, Jung-gu, Daejeon, 301-723, Republic of Korea. zambo9@catholic.ac.kr.
Catholic University of Korea · KRThe Catholic University of Korea Seoul St. Mary's Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) has been introduced for totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. Clinically, however, the benefits of single-port TEP (SP TEP) are unclear. This study aimed to compare short-term surgical outcomes between SP TEP and conventional laparoscopic TEP(CL TEP) inguinal hernia repair.

methodsBetween January 2013 and February 2015, 99 men with primary unilateral inguinal hernia were randomized to the single-port or conventional 3-port TEP procedures. The primary end point was postoperative pain. Secondary end points were complications, postoperative hospital stay, days to return to daily normal activities, cosmesis, and quality of life (QOL).

resultsWe randomized 50 patients to SP TEP and 49 to CL TEP repair. The SP TEP group patients had significantly lower pain scores (visual analog scale) 7 days postoperation (p = 0.017). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative pain scores 24 h (p = 0.44) and 4 weeks (p = 0.677) after operation and analgesic requirements on the operation day (p = 0.303) and 7 days after the operation (p = 0.204). Operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were comparable between the two groups. The days to return to daily normal activities, QOL, and cosmetic satisfaction were not different between the two groups.

conclusionThe outcomes of SP TEP hernia repair for operation time and morbidities were comparable to CL TEP, and postoperative pain was lower at 7 days than in CL TEP hernia repair. The SP TEP technique can be recommended as an alternative treatment for inguinal hernia repair in experienced hands.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDouble-Blind MethodHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainProspective StudiesInguinal herniaLaparoscopicSingle-portTotal extraperitoneal

Identifiers

PMID27142209
OpenAlexW2346752823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.