Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27478810›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2016

Two-port laparoscopic appendectomy assisted with needle grasper comparison with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

Turgut Donmez, Adnan Hut, Huseyin Avaroglu, Sinan Uzman, Dogan Yildirim, Sina Ferahman, Erdinc Cekic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Turgut DonmezDepartment of General Surgery, Lutfiye Nuri Burat State Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Adnan HutDepartment of General Surgery, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Huseyin AvarogluDepartment of General Surgery, Lutfiye Nuri Burat State Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Sinan UzmanDepartment of Anesteziologist, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Dogan YildirimDepartment of General Surgery, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Sina FerahmanDepartment of General Surgery, Istanbul University, Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Erdinc CekicDepartment of Otolaryngology, Lutfiye Nuri Burat State Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe 2-port laparoscopic appendectomy technique (TLA) is between the conventional 3-port and single-port laparoscopic appendectomy surgeries. We compared postoperative pain and cosmetic results after TLA with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) by a 3-port device.

methodsPatients undergoing TLA were matched with patients undergoing CLA between February 2015 and November 2015 at the same institution. Thirty-two patients underwent TLA with a needle grasper. The appendix was secured by a percutaneous organ-holding device (needle grasper), then removed through a puncture at McBurney's point. Another 38 patients underwent CLA. Patient demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were collected and evaluated.

resultsOne patient in the TLA group developed a wound infection and 1 patient in the CLA group developed a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess and 3 wound infections. There was no significant difference between the groups when comparing the length of hospital stay, time until oral intake, and other complications. The pain score in the first 12 hours after surgery was significanly higher in CLA group than the TLA group (P < 0.001). Operative time was significantly shorter in the CLA group compared to the TLA group (P < 0.001).

conclusionTLA using a needle grasper was associated with a significantly lower pain score 12 hours after surgery, better cosmetic results, and lower cost, than the CLA 3-port procedure because of the fewer number of ports.

Indexed as

AppendectomyLaparoscopic surgeryMinimal invasive surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID27478810
PMCPMC4961887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.