ArticlePediatric surgery international2023
Efficacy of a modified needle grasper for single-port laparoscopic hernia repair in children: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative research on efficacy of needle grasper and mobile retractor-assisted laparoscopic high ligation of hernia sac in treatment of pediatric indirect inguinal hernia.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Efficacy of transumbilical single-port and two-port laparoscopy in the treatment of pediatric inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Laparoscopic-enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for incarcerated inguinal hernia: a paradigm shift toward precision emergency herniology.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe advantage of using the single-port technique over the conventional two-port approach is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a single-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (SLPEC) using a modified needle grasper in children and compare the results to those of two-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (TLPEC).
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis of SLPEC and TLPEC surgery from February 2016 to June 2021 was conducted at our institution. Pediatric patients underwent SLPEC using the modified needle grasper to complete the high ligation of the hernia sac, while operations in the conventional two-port group only used regular laparoscopic instruments. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to reduce selection bias.
resultsOf 1320 patients, 1169 were included in the single-port/two-port crude evaluation, with 930 in the PSM cohort (465 patients/arm). Among 1:1 matched patients, the operation time for single-port patients vs. two-port patients were 11.28 ± 3.98 vs. 15.47 ± 4.54 min for unilateral repair and 16.86 ± 4.59 vs. 20.40 ± 4.29 min for bilateral repair (p < .05). Cosmetic results did not differ between the SLPEC and TLPEC groups (0% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.249). The recurrence rates were comparable between the two groups (0.6% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.725). Moreover, the differences in surgical site infection (SSI), testicular atrophy, open conversion and postoperative hydrocele occurrence were insignificant between the two groups.
conclusionsIn this cohort study, the modified needle grasper is a safe and feasible instrument for SLPEC, and SLPEC using the needle grasper has a shorter operation time than TLPEC.
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.