Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31685027›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2019

Systematic review of comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer.

Xin Liu, Wei-Hong Yang, Zhou-Guang Jiao, Ji-Fu Zhang, Rui Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xin LiuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital and Institute, No 44 Xiaoheyan Road, Dadong District, Shenyang, 110042, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China.
Wei-Hong YangInstitute of Physical Science and Information Technology, Anhui University, Hefei, 230601, Anhui Province, People's Republic of China.
Zhou-Guang JiaoState Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Beijing, 100071, People's Republic of China.
Ji-Fu ZhangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital and Institute, No 44 Xiaoheyan Road, Dadong District, Shenyang, 110042, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China.
Rui ZhangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital and Institute, No 44 Xiaoheyan Road, Dadong District, Shenyang, 110042, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China. zhangrui612006@sina.com.
Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute · CNAnhui University · CNChina Medical University · CNInstitute of Microbiology · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (CN) National Natural Science Fund from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos.81672427)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has long used in surgery for a long time. However, there is barely a systemic review related to the comparison between the SILS and the conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (CLS) for the right colon cancer in the long term follow-up. Herein, we used the most recent articles to compare these two techniques by meta-analysis.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Wanfang databases to compare SILS with CLS for right colon cancer up to May 2019. The operative, postoperative, pathological and mid-term follow-up outcomes of nine studies were extracted and compared.

resultsA total of 1356 patients participated in 9 studies, while 653 patients were assigned to the SILS group and 703 patients were assigned to the CLS group. The patients' baselines in the SILS group were consistent with those in the CLS group. Compared to the CLS group, the SILS group had a shorter operation duration (SMD - 23.49, 95%CI - 36.71 to - 10.27, P < 0.001, chi-square = 24.11), shorter hospital stay (SMD - 0.76, 95% `CI - 1.07 to - 0.45, P < 0.001, chi-square = 9.85), less blood loss (SMD - 8.46, 95% CI - 14.59 to - 2.34; P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.26), smaller incision length (SMD - 1.60, 95% CI - 2.66 to - 0.55, P < 0.001; chi-square = 280.44), more lymph node harvested (SMD - 0.98, 95% CI - 1.79 to - 0.16, P < 0.05; chi-square = 4.61), and a longer proximal surgical edge (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.93 to - 0.09, P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.42). No significant difference was found in other indexes. After we removed a single large study, we performed another meta-analysis again. The operation duration in the SILS group was still better than that in the CLS group.

conclusionSILS could be a faster and more reliable approach than CLS for the right colon cancer and could accelerate patient recovery, especially for patients with a low BMI.

Indexed as

Blood Loss, SurgicalColectomyColonic NeoplasmsHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayOperative TimeTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeConventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomyMeta-analysisRight colon cancerSingle incision

Identifiers

PMID31685027
PMCPMC6829956
OpenAlexW2988976673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.