Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37554021›Full record

ArticleAnnals of Saudi medicine

Abdominal access in laparoscopic surgery of obese patients: a novel abdominal access technique.

Mesut Polat, Adnan Incebiyik, Omer Tammo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of Saudi medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Mesut PolatFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zeynep Kamil Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Adnan IncebiyikFrom the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Harran University - Osmanbey Campus, Sanliurfa, Turkey.
Omer TammoFrom the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Mardin Training and Research Hospital, Mardin, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-0048-3586

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn important step in laparoscopic surgery is abdominal access. Several abdominal access techniques have been described to reduce complications. We compare our novel abdominal access technique (MESAD) with other abdominal access techniques, particularly to reduce complications in obese patients.

objectiveCompare the MESAD method and other methods we use for abdominal access in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery of obese patients

designRetrospective

settingGynecology department in university hospital PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients who underwent abdominal access by the MESAD technique, the Veress needle technique, and the Hasson technique were included in our study. In addition to demographic data, minor and major complications, number of unsuccessful attempts, conversion to another technique, and abdominal access times were collected from all patient files.

main outcome measuresClinical data and complications SAMPLE SIZE: 66 patients, 26 by MESAD technique, 24 by the Veress needle technique, and 16 by the Hasson technique.

resultsThere were two major complications (one in the Veress group and one in the Hasson technique group) and 7 minor complications. No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of complications (

conclusionsThe MESAD technique is an easy method to both learn and teach. We think that the low major-minor complication rates in the MESAD technique will allow surgeons to reduce their anxiety at the first entry and to perform a more comfortable operation. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansNeedlesObesityRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37554021
PMCPMC10716838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.