Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386447›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2023

Advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop during laparoscopic appendectomy in uncomplicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled study.

Kil-Yong Lee, Jaeim Lee, Youn Young Park, Seong Taek Oh

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kil-Yong LeeDivision of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 271, Cheonbo-ro, Uijeongbu-si, Gyeonggi-do, 11765, Republic of Korea.
Jaeim LeeDivision of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 271, Cheonbo-ro, Uijeongbu-si, Gyeonggi-do, 11765, Republic of Korea. lji96@catholic.ac.kr.
Youn Young ParkDepartment of Surgery, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seong Taek OhDivision of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 271, Cheonbo-ro, Uijeongbu-si, Gyeonggi-do, 11765, Republic of Korea.
The Catholic University of Korea Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital · KRCatholic University of Korea · KRKyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolymeric clips are easy to apply, but whether they present more advantages than endoloops is unclear. This single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial study was conducted to compare the advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop in terms of the surgical time.

methodsAdult patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis without perforation on preoperative abdominal computed tomography and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between August 6, 2019, and December 26, 2022, were included. Single-blinded randomization was performed in a 1:1 ratio between the endoloop and polymeric clip groups. The primary endpoint was the difference in surgery time between the polymeric clip and endoloop groups. The secondary endpoints were the difference in the application time of each instrument, difference in operation and anesthesia fees, as well as the frequency of complications.

resultsThe completed trial included 104 and 103 patients in the polymeric clip and endoloop groups, respectively. The median surgery time with a polymeric clip was shorter than that with an endoloop; however, the difference was not significant (18 min 56 s vs 19 min 49 s, p = 0.426). Interestingly, the median time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting in the polymeric clip group was significantly shorter than that in the endoloop group (49.0 s vs 84.5 s, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of surgical (p = 0.120) and anesthetic (p = 0.719) costs, as well as the total number of postoperative complications (p > 0.999).

conclusionA polymeric clip is a safe instrument that can reduce the time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting, although it does not affect the overall surgical time and operation fee when performing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis.

trial registrationKCT0004154.

Indexed as

AppendectomyAppendicitisLaparoscopyAdultHumansResearch DesignSurgical InstrumentsAppendectomyAppendicitisLaparoscopeSurgical clip

Identifiers

PMID37386447
PMCPMC10311724
OpenAlexW4382631525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.