ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2017
Experimental use of a novel single-port gasless laparoendoscopic operative field formation device.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of a new gasless method and the conventional COUpdates in surgery · 2021Trial
- KeyLoop retractor for global gasless laparoscopy: evaluation of safety and feasibility in a porcine model.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTraditional laparaendoscopic surgery using CO2 pneumoperitoneum is associated with complications and the existing gasless laparaendoscopic surgery has shortcomings such as poor visibility in the operation field. To overcome the disadvantages of the current lifting gasless laparaendoscopic operation platforms, we developed an inflatable device for gasless laparoscopic operation field formation (LOFF) that can be internally installed and applied in practice.
methodsWe initially designed operation platforms for gasless laparaendoscopic single-port (GLESP) surgery. Subsequently, a triangular prismatic LOFF device was selected and applied successfully to GLESP cholecystectomy of five pigs. Ultimately, using pigs as a model, three surgical approaches (LOFF-assisted laparaendoscopic single-site (LOFF-LESS), LESS surgery, and traditional lifting (GLESP) were compared, and the advantages and drawbacks of inflatable devices for gasless laparoscopic operation field assessed.
resultsThe use of the LOFF device in GLESP cholecystectomy was first evaluated. The time for surgical space formation (4.4 ± 1.2 and 4.8 ± 1.0), the operating time for gallbladder removal (25.2 ± 4.8 and 25.4 ± 2.7), and the loss of blood (9.4 ± 3.1and 9.2 ± 2.4) was similar between LESS and LOFF, respectively (Table 2). In contrast these parameters were higher in GLESP (6.6 ± 1.0, 30.3 ± 4.4 and 10.1 ± 2.0, respectively. The LOFF-LESS surgery exhibited a clearer exposure of the surgical field and shorter operating time than the GLESP surgery. LESS technology showed less postoperation pain, fast recovery, and extremely high cosmetic satisfaction.
conclusionThe LOFF device provides a safe, effective, and feasible operation platform that can be internally installed and inflated for GLESP surgery during cholescytectomy in animal models.
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.