ArticleUpdates in surgery2021
Are there any limits for laparoscopy in splenomegaly? Our experience.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preoperative high-precision three-dimensional reconstruction in laparoscopic splenectomy for supramassive splenomegaly: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic Splenectomy of a Wandering Pelvic Splenomegaly in a Young Woman Treated in Childhood with Surgery for Diaphragmatic Hernia and Adhesiolysis for Intestinal Obstruction.The American journal of case reports · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic splenectomy in the case of massive or supermassive splenomegaly has been associated with higher conversion rates and morbidity. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic splenectomy for massive spleens and to identify if there are limits beyond which the laparoscopic approach is not recommended in massive and supermassive spleens. This is a retrospective study of 93 consecutive laparoscopic splenectomies in adult patients performed by a single surgeon, from January 2008 to December 2017. The data collected included the patient's age, sex, ASA, spleen weight, volume and dimension, type of disease, hospital stay, surgical technique, operative time. Median splenic weight was 400 g (range 65-3800 g) and median volume was 1365 cc (range 600-3800). Median operative time was 120 min and the overall conversion rate was 5.4%. Globally, 52 patients (55.9%) had a normal-weight spleen, 25 (26.9%) had massive and 16 (17.2%) had supermassive splenomegaly. In splenomegaly group (n = 41), patient's age, percentage of malignant diagnosis, spleen weight, anteroposterior (AP), medio-lateral (ML) and craniocaudal (CC) diameter, surgical time and conversion rate were significantly higher compared to normal-weight spleen patients. None of the normal-weight spleen patients underwent open conversion, while 5 patients among 41 splenomegalic cases underwent laparotomic conversion (12.2%). Comparing massive and super-massive patients, the latter showed longer operative time and hospital length of stay, and higher conversion rate. We identified as significant cut-off limits for higher conversion risk a spleen weight ≥ 1300 g and a spleen CC diameter ≥ 22 cm. In our experience laparoscopy was the gold standard in the case of spleen weight and diameter equal to or less than 1300 g and 22 cm, but it was safe and feasible also in the case of larger spleens, taking into account the greater risk of conversion.
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.