ArticleCureus2022
Laparoscopic Appendectomy Using the Surgical-Glove Port Through an Umbilical Incision: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute appendicitis and its treatment: a historical overview.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Case Report: Laparoscopic appendectomy in a patient with congenital visceral heterotaxy and severe adhesions.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- A brief overview of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy as an optimal surgical procedure for patients with acute appendicitis: still a long way to go.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Review
- Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-hole laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in children by senior pediatric surgeons: a multicenter study from China.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Is Transumbilical Laparoscopic-assisted Appendectomy Better than Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children? A Randomized Controlled Study.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) has recently emerged as a promising alternative for the management of acute appendicitis. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of the SILA with those of three laparoscopic appendectomies (TLA) procedures using the existing equipment, the 10-mm laparoscope, and the surgical-glove port method. Methodology Between February 2021 and February 2022, this single-center retrospective study examined 68 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy by a single surgeon. The study excluded patients with severe appendicitis, grade IV-V, following the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification. Clinical outcomes were analyzed, including operation time, hospital stay, postoperative pain, and postoperative morbidity. Results There were no statistically significant differences between SILA and TLA patients, respectively, in operation time (37.5 minutes vs. 35 minutes, p = 0.261) and the median duration of hospitalization (three days vs. three days, p = 0.929). There was no difference in the mean visual analog scale score between the two groups on the first day (p = 0.852), second day (p = 0.540), and the day of discharge from the hospital (p = 0.686), as well as return to diet (two days vs. two days, p = 0.053). Two (10%) cases of short-term complications in the SILA group and one (2.1%) case in the TLA group were noted. Conclusions SILA performed through a handmade surgical-glove port is a safe and viable therapy option for mild-to-moderate appendicitis. When the hospital lacks a specialized laparoscopic single-incision surgical system, this technique should be used on patients.
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.