SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2018
Systematic review of single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Single incision laparoscopy versus conventional multiport laparoscopy for colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2023Pooled it
- The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Is Single-Incision Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Safe and Efficient for the Treatment of Malignant Hepatic Tumors? A Systematic Review.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Efficiency in image-guided robotic and conventional camera steering: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Trial
- Comparative evaluation of single-incision laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery with transabdominal postperitoneal approach for synchronous ileocecal and sigmoid cancers: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of postoperative inflammation and pain: robot-assisted versus single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right-sided colon cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic-assisted surgery for Meckel's diverticulum in children: a single-center propensity score analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons' preference on rectal cancer treatment.Annals of coloproctology · 2023Article
- Article
- A clinical study of inferior mesenteric artery typing in laparoscopic radical resections with left colonic artery preservation of rectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of clinical and pathological outcomes.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Review
- A study on spinal level, length, and branch type of the inferior mesenteric artery and the position relationship between the inferior mesenteric artery, left colic artery, and inferior mesenteric vein.BMC medical imaging · 2022Article
- Comparison of clinical safety and feasibility between reduced-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: A retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Early return to work: Single-port vs. multiport laparoscopic surgery for benign ovarian tumor.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Learning curve of surgical novices using the single-port platform SymphonX: minimizing OR trauma to only one 15-mm incision.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Oncologic long-term outcome of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- Short-term clinical and oncological outcomes after single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a retrospective clinical analysis of 30 cases.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Comparison of Survival between Single-Access and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer.Minimally invasive surgery · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo explore whether single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has the better short-term clinical and pathological outcomes than conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer.
methodsA literature investigation of MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), and Wanfang databases for relevant researches was performed. Fixed effects and random effects models were used to calculate the corresponding outcomes. Standardized mean difference and risk ratio were calculated for continuous and dichotomous variables separately.
resultsNine clinical controlled trials were composed of two randomized clinical trials and seven non-randomized clinical trials with a total of 829 patients. Two hundred ninety-nine (36.1%) patients underwent SILS, and 530 (63.9%) patients underwent CLS. The meta-analysis showed that SILS had more lymph node resection (SMD - 0.25, 95% CI - 0.50 to - 0.002) and less defecation time (SMD - 0.46, 95% CI - 0.75 to - 0.17), exhaust time (SMD - 0.46, 95% CI - 0.75 to - 0.18), and hospital stay (SMD - 0.30, 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.15 than CLS. SILS was also accompanied with shorter incision length (SMD - 2.46, 95% CI - 4.02 to - 0.90), less pain score (SMD - 0.56, 95% CI - 0.91 to - 0.21), and lower complication rate (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.91). Blood loss, operative time, distal margin, conversion rate, anastomotic fistula, readmission, local recurrence, and distant metastasis showed no statistical differences in two groups. In all subgroup analysis, SILS also had advantages of incision length, operative time, defecation time, exhaust time, and hospitalization time than CLS.
conclusionSILS could be a more safe and reliable surgical technique than CLS for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer. However, further high-quality studies between these two techniques need to be further developed.
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.