ReviewMinimally invasive surgery2024
Systematic Review of Utilized Ports in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Pushing the Boundaries.
Review in Minimally invasive surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Two-point lifting/retracting technology for transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on the anatomical features of Calot's triangle.World journal of gastrointestinal 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Surgical procedures have undergone a paradigm shift in the last 3 decades, with minimally invasive surgery becoming standard of care for a number of surgeries, including the treatment of benign gallbladder diseases. By providing a thorough and impartial summary of the earlier published systematic reviews, the current systematic review is the first to present comparison results. This review illustrates the data of intraoperative and postoperative results of each laparoscopic cholecystectomy technique. Materials and Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was meticulously followed to conduct the present systematic review. MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science were searched for eligible publications, and a total of 14 systematic reviews were included. A newly developed extraction table was utilized to obtain the predefined parameters from eligible systematic reviews, including operative time, conversion rate, estimated blood loss, bile leak, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, and cosmetic results. All statistical analyses were conducted using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 26.0. The analysis of dichotomous results was summarized using relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and continuous results were summarized using mean differences and 95% CIs. The proportions were compared using a single proportion Results: The analysis of our primary and secondary outcomes revealed a statistically significant improvement in aesthetic results after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in comparison to the multiport approach of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This, however, is accompanied by extended operative timing and subsequently, prolonged exposure to anesthesia. Conclusion: Patients should be carefully selected for SILC to minimize technical difficulties and prevent complications both intraoperatively and shortly after the procedure. This trial is registered with CRD42023392037.
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.