Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2018
Single-port laparoscopic surgery in uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01007318 (Prospective, Randomized Study of Single Port and Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Acute Appendicitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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.
Prospective, Randomized Study of Single Port and Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Acute Appendicitis
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of single-incision versus three-port laparoscopic appendectomy comparing operation time and postoperative pain.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Single-port vs multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a systematic review.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for suspected uncomplicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Updates in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for suspected uncomplicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port approach for acute appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2021Pooled it
- Holder-free single-port laparoscopic appendectomy as solo surgery and learning curve analysis of 100 cases.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using new surgical procedure versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using a needle-type grasping forceps compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a single-center retrospective study.The Journal of international medical research · 2022Article
- Comparison of postoperative pain after needle grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial (PANASILA trial).Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2021Article
- Risk factors for additional port insertion in single-port laparoscopic appendectomy.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is an alternative, minimally invasive surgical approach for managing appendicitis. The aim of this randomized trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SPLS in uncomplicated appendicitis.
methodsBetween December 2009 and November 2010, 194 patients with radiologically diagnosed acute appendicitis were randomly allocated to undergo either SPLS or multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS). Patients with intraoperative findings of perforated appendicitis were excluded from the analysis. The primary endpoint was perioperative morbidity. All data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle.
resultsFourteen cases were excluded from the analysis. Of the remaining 180 patients, 90 were assigned to the SPLS group, and 90 to the MPLS group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. In the SPLS group, the rate of conversion to MPLS was 11.1%. The operation time was 14.5 min longer for SPLS than for MPLS (p < 0.01), but there was no between-group difference in the rate of intraoperative complications (SPLS, 4.4%; MPLS, 0%; p = 0.12) or postoperative complications (SPLS, 4.4%; MPLS, 2.2%; p = 0.68). Compared to the MPLS group, the SPLS group had higher cumulative dose of analgesics (tramadol; 73.9 vs. 51.7 mg, p = 0.04), longer postoperative time to first passage of flatus (27.7 vs. 20.1 h, p < 0.01), longer postoperative hospitalization (2.5 vs. 2.1 days, p < 0.05), and higher total cost (1826.9 vs. 1662.4 USD, p < 0.01).
conclusionsThis randomized trial indicates that, compared to MPLS, SPLS does not increase the rate of perioperative or postoperative complications in uncomplicated appendicitis, but may have disadvantages such as increased operation time, later postoperative functional recovery, longer hospital stay, and higher costs, although the difference is minimal (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01007318).
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.