ReviewCureus2022
Recent Technical Developments in the Field of Laparoscopic Surgery: A Literature Review.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic esophageal hiatal hernia and anti-reflux surgery: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Common auricular acupoint patterns for postoperative recovery across laparoscopic surgeries: a data mining-based systematic analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Erector spinae plane block for laparoscopic surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep neuromuscular blockade versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease: a non-inferiority randomized control trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Trial
- The risk of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke in pelvic cancer surgery.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Laparoscopy in the Surgical Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Comprehensive Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Two-point lifting/retracting technology for transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on the anatomical features of Calot's triangle.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of different routes of magnesium sulfate administration combined with quadratus lumborum block on postoperative analgesia and recovery quality in patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy: a prospective, randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Analysis of hospitalization costs in adult inguinal hernia: based on quantile regression model.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Innovations in Hybrid Laparoscopic Surgery: Integrating Advanced Technologies for Multidisciplinary Cases.Cureus · 2024Review
- Partnering With Technology: Advancing Laparoscopy With Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.Cureus · 2024Article
- Comparison of Mortality and Postoperative Complications Between Open and Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: An Umbrella Review.Minimally invasive surgery · 2024Review
- Article
- Surgical Frontiers: A Comparative Review of Robotics Versus Laparoscopy in Gynecological Interventions.Cureus · 2023Review
- Introduction of Laparoscopy in an Urban High-Volume Sub-Saharan Trauma Centre.World journal of surgery · 2023Review
- Strictly-controlled techniques are required in laparoscopic appendectomy for elemental mercury sequestration in the appendix: a case report.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- A Multi-Task Convolutional Neural Network for Semantic Segmentation and Event Detection in Laparoscopic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
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 benefits of laparoscopic surgery (LS) include a speedy recovery, shorter duration of hospital stay, minimal postoperative pain, discomfort and disabilities, and better cosmetic outcomes (less scarring) that help an individual to resume normal daily activities and return to work. A comprehensive literature search on laparoscopic surgeries was conducted using different Internet-based search engines and databases from August 2021 to October 2021. The search was limited to articles published in the English language and those published between years 2005 and 2021. A total of 126 articles were initially identified. Two independent reviewers thoroughly examined the quality and content of the articles. Articles with duplicate data were excluded, and the remaining articles were screened and assessed by the titles and abstracts. After a vigorous assessment, we included data from 49 articles for this review process. Bibliographic management was done using the software "EndNote" (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY, USA). It was concluded that LS has become the technique of choice for virtually every kind of abdominal surgery, evident by numerous scholarly publications in this field. Level I evidence demonstrating the advantage of LS over open surgery has been reported for numerous operations, including fundoplication for gastroesophageal regurgitation disease, bariatric surgery for weight loss, and cancer resection. Advanced LS has subsequently been expanded to include hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, urology, and gynecology. Patients who are at risk of having elevated abdominal pressure during LS, however, should proceed with care. Recent advances in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery are promising.
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.