ReviewInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2023
Laparoscopic entry techniques: Which should you prefer?
Review in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Four-Clamp Technique for primary laparoscopic access in morbidly obese patients: a retrospective cohort study.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2026Article
- Abortive Tubal Stump Pregnancy: Two Case Reports with Diagnostic Challenges and High Risk of Persistent Ectopic Pregnancy.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Impact of seamless intervention in the operating room combined with pain management on the efficiency of urological laparoscopic surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Article
- Article
- Cancer in pregnancy: FIGO Best practice advice and narrative review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Prevention and Treatment of Intraoperative Complications During Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgery: Practical Tips and Tricks-A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2025Review
- Comparative outcomes of Palmer, Umbilical Veress needle, and open entry techniques in robotic-assisted surgery: a propensity-matched analysis of 9482 patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic entry techniques: Which should you prefer?International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023Review
- Minimizing Risk of Retroperitoneal Major Vascular Injury with Abdominal Wall Elevation Device during Abdominal Entry for Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
- The Sakarya Technique for Safer Laparoscopic Access.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
- Abdominal access in laparoscopic surgery of obese patients: a novel abdominal access technique.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a debate spanning two decades, no consensus has been achieved about the safest laparoscopic entry technique.
objectivesTo update the evidence about the safety of the main different laparoscopic entry techniques. SEARCH STRATEGY: Six electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different laparoscopic entry techniques were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Entry-related complications and total time for entry were compared among the different methods of entry calculating pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); P < 0.05 was considered significant. MAIN
resultsIn total, 25 RCTs (6950 patients) were included. Complications considered were vascular, visceral and omental injury, failed entry, extraperitoneal insufflation, bleeding and infection at the trocar site bleeding, and incisional hernia. Compared to direct trocar, the OR for Veress needle was significantly higher for omental injury (OR 3.65, P < 0.001), for failed entry (OR 4.19, P < 0.001), and for extraperitoneal insufflation (OR 5.29, P < 0.001). Compared to the open method, the OR for Veress needle was significantly higher for omental injury (OR 4.93, P = 0.001), for failed entry (OR 2.99, P < 0.001), for extraperitoneal insufflation (OR 4.77; P = 0.04), and for incisional hernia. Compared to the open method, the OR for direct trocar was significantly lower for visceral injury (OR 0.17, P = 0.002) and for trocar site infection (OR 0.27, P = 0.001).
conclusionsThe direct trocar method may be preferred over Veress needle and open methods as a laparoscopic entry technique since it appears associated to a lower risk of complications.
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.