ArticleIrish journal of medical science2018
Port insertion for minimally invasive surgery: a report of practices in the Irish Republic.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith rapidly evolving surgical technologies, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become the mainstay approach for many surgeons worldwide. As laparoscopic surgery was introduced in Ireland over two decades ago, we may be encountering a higher prevalence of related complications.
aimsThis study aimed to gather data pertaining to risk factors for port-site herniation in MIS.
methodsA 14-point anonymous questionnaire was distributed electronically between January and May 2017 to consultant and trainee laparoscopists in the Republic of Ireland. This survey related to laparoscopic volume and surgical approaches to laparoscopic port-sites.
resultsThere were 172 eligible responses nationally. Approaches to peritoneal access included Hasson, veress (blind puncture) and SILS were 66.3, 32.6 and 1.2%, respectively. Senior surgeons and specialists in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (OBGYN) reported significantly higher utilisations of closed peritoneal access (p < 0.05). Of the participants, 119 (69.2%) reported using a bladeless trocar over a bladed type. Fascial closure was utilised in 94.2% of ≥ 10 mm and 2.3% of 5-mm ports using absorbable suture in 76.7%, non-absorbable suture in 14.5% and port closure devices in 8.7%. Perceptions of risk factors for PSH were not congruent with significant variations in responses between levels of expertise.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates significant variations in laparoscopic port-site practices amongst surgeons nationally. The new era of practitioners may benefit from evidence-based technical workshops and guidelines to increase awareness and reduce potential 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.