SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2024
Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of single-incision versus three-port laparoscopic appendectomy comparing operation time and postoperative pain.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Updates in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of body mass index on perioperative outcomes and short-term recovery profiles of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Efficacy of Standardized Care for Abdominal Drainage Tubes in the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of transumbilical single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Review
- Real-world data of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a German-wide prospective cohort study among 276 individuals.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Feasibility of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy for retrocecal appendicitis: A propensity score-matched study with multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of trans-umbilical single-port laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy for repair of perforated peptic ulcer in pediatric patients: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Postoperative abdominopelvic adhesion and umbilical wound validation after single-port laparoscopy or two-port laparoscopy for gynecological surgery: a comparison with conventional laparoscopy.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Modified single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using needle-type grasping forcepsWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Learning curve of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy in a low-volume hospital.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- The efficacy and safety of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgeryGland surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Single-incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Adult Acute Appendicitis.Juntendo Iji zasshi = Juntendo medical journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional three-access laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) is currently the gold standard treatment, however, Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) has been proposed as an alternative. The aim of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate safety and efficacy of SILA compared with conventional approach.
methodsPer PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CLA vs SILA for acute appendicitis. The randomised Mantel-Haenszel method was used for the meta-analysis. Statistical data analysis was performed with the Review Manager software and the risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane "Risk of Bias" assessment tool.
resultsTwenty-one studies (RCTs) were selected (2646 patients). The operative time was significantly longer in the SILA group (MD = 7,32), confirmed in both paediatric (MD = 9,80), (Q = 1,47) and adult subgroups (MD = 5,92), (Q = 55,85). Overall postoperative morbidity was higher in patients who underwent SILA, but the result was not statistically significant. In SILA group were assessed shorter hospital stays, fewer wound infections and higher conversion rate, but the results were not statistically significant. Meta-analysis was not performed about cosmetics of skin scars and postoperative pain because different scales were used in each study.
conclusionsThis analysis show that SILA, although associated with fewer postoperative wound infection, has a significantly longer operative time. Furthermore, the risk of postoperative general complications is still present. Further studies will be required to analyse outcomes related to postoperative pain and the cosmetics of the surgical scar.
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.