ArticleBMC surgery2022
Needle consideration in umbilical two-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for patent processus vaginalis of children: hook-needle or forcep-needle.
Article in BMC surgery, 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough umbilical two-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for the treatment of processus vaginalis patency of children has been verified to be safe and effective, the improvements of technical skills and instruments have been always on their ways. Recently, forcep-needle has begun to be used. In this study, we compared forcep-needle with hook-needle in this minimal invasive procedure for children suffered from hernia or hydrocele, with the aim to evaluate the instrumental convenience of the two needles.
methodsFrom July 2021 to May 2022, we begun to use hook-needle or forcep-needle in umbilical two-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for children suffered from hernia or hydrocele. The hook-needle group included nineteen children and the forcep-needle group included twenty-four ones. The data of the patients age, sex, side, operation time, postoperative hospital-stay, follow-up time, postoperative complications were evaluated. Common silk thread was used to encircle the internal ring preperitoneally.
resultsThere were no statistical differences between the two groups for the following items: age, sex, side, operation time, postoperative hospital-stay and postoperative complications (P > 0.05). The follow-up time of the hook-needle group was longer than that of the forcep-one (P = 0.0020). No open transfer happened for all the patients. One hydrocele boy in the hook-needle group reoccurred 1 month postoperatively due to the peritoneal broken. The single pole retreating of the hook-needle accompanied with chaotic movements, while for that of the forcep-needle, the double-arm retreating movements were more orderly. The outer surface of the forcep-needle was smooth without restrain, as for the hook-needle, an inlaid barb held the danger of brokening the peritoneum.
conclusionIn our preliminary experience of umbilical two-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure using a hook-needle or a forcep-needle, in view of the instrumental convenience and safety, the double-arm and smooth outer surface designs of the forcep-needle contained more spatial orientation perceptions and safety.
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.