SynthesisSurgery today2019
A review of reports on single-incision laparoscopic surgery for Crohn's disease.
Synthesis in Surgery today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect and mechanism of total ginsenosides repairing SDS‑inducedExperimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic redo surgery for recurrent Crohn's disease: A comparative clinical study of over 100 consecutive patients.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for the treatment of ileocolonic Crohn's disease: a propensity score-matched analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this review was to analyze the currently available literature on single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for Crohn's disease (CD) with respect to surgical indications, surgical techniques, feasibility, and possible benefits of SILS for CD. A systematic query of articles published from January 2010 to July 2018 was performed. The studies were assessed for patient's age, gender, body mass index, disease type, SILS procedure, surgical procedure, incision length, operation time, rates of conversion to open surgery, postoperative complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and rates of reoperation. After an initial review, 11 reports were selected. The surgical techniques and instruments showed wide variation. The mean operation time for SILS tended to be shorter than that for multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS). The reported rates of conversion to open surgery and postoperative complications were not very different from those reported for MLS. In conclusion, the present review suggests that the SILS technique may be feasible and safe for select patients with CD. However, because we reviewed only a few studies with small sample sizes, prospectively designed trials with a large number of patients are required to clarify the true benefits of SILS for CD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30805721What 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.