ArticleRevista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina)2022
[Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: experience with an original technique].
Article in Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery (HALS) is an alternative to straight laparoscopic approach (SL) that requires the use of a specific device to maintain the pneumoperitoneum. Our group has described an original double glove technique to replace it. Our purpose was to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing HALS using this original technique vs SL. Methods: Retrospective review of a prospective database including patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resections between 2004 to 2020 at the Hospital Italiano, Argentina. Logistic regression analysis, propensity score matching, and inverse probability weighting were used to estimate adjusted treatment effects for perioperative outcomes. Results: HALS (n=458) and SL (n=1692) cases were demographically similar. HALS was associated with a shorter operative time (170.3 vs 206.9 minutes, p<0.001). Such difference was even more pronounced in obese (44.1 min), large patients (37.5 min), complex procedures (33.8 min) and surgeries carried out by non-trained surgeons (57,6 vs 31,6 minutes, p<0.001). Hand-assisted was associated with a lower conversion rate (5% vs 9.9%, p<0.001) with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.45 (95%CI 0.28-0.73). No difference in hospital stay, morbidity, and readmission rates was found. Conclusions: HALS with double-glove technique is comparable to SL in terms of postoperative outcomes keeping reduced operative time and conversion rates, especially in obese patients undergoing complex procedures.
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.