Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30588528›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2018

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases.

Ye-Ji Lee, Ju Ik Moon, In-Seok Choi, Sang-Eok Lee, Nak-Song Sung, Seong-Wook Kwon, Dae-Sung Yoon, Won-Jun Choi, Si-Min Park

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Early Outcomes of Robotic Single Site Cholecystectomy Using the DaVinci Xi® System.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ye-Ji LeeDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Ju Ik MoonDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
In-Seok ChoiDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Sang-Eok LeeDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Nak-Song SungDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Seong-Wook KwonDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Dae-Sung YoonDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Won-Jun ChoiDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Si-Min ParkDepartment of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.
Konyang University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS/

aimsThis study was conducted to verify and compare the safety and feasibility of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).

methodsA total of 2,080 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a single center, Konyang University Hospital, between 2010 and 2016. We retrospectively compared the demographics, perioperative outcome, and postoperative complication results between the CLC and SILC groups.

resultsAmong the 2,080 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1,080 had CLC and 1,000 had SILC. When retrospectively reviewed, the SILC group had significantly higher percentages of patients who were aged under 80 years, who were women, and had the American Society of Anesthesiologist score of lower than 3 points compared to those of the CLC group. Furthermore, the CLC group had a higher percentage of patients with acute cholecystitis or empyema, whereas the SILC group had a higher percentage of patients with chronic cholecystitis. Preoperative percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage insertion or H-vac insertion was more frequently conducted, bleeding loss was more common, and hospital stay was longer in the CLC group. Postoperative complications such as wound infection, biloma, bile duct injury, and duodenal perforation were not significantly different between the two groups.

conclusionsIn conclusion, if performed after preoperative patient selection such as in younger and female patients with no abdominal operation history at the time of benign gallbladder surgery, SILC can be considered feasible and safe without additional complications when compared with CLC.

Indexed as

Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomySingle incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Identifiers

PMID30588528
PMCPMC6295377
OpenAlexW2902454684

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.