Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39687811›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Outcome of Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Retrospective Study From a Local Secondary Referral Hospital.

Haytham Alarfaj, Mohammed S Bu Bshait

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. 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

2 authors.

Haytham AlarfajDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Faisal University, Al Ahsa, SAU.
Mohammed S Bu BshaitDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Faisal University, Al Ahsa, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Laparoscopic appendectomy is currently considered the operation of choice for patients with suspected acute appendicitis. This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic appendectomy in the setting of a secondary referral hospital. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023. Records of patients older than 14 years of age who underwent appendectomy were retrieved. Patients were divided according to the type of technique used into two groups: group I (G1) consisted of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and group II (G2) included those with an open appendectomy. Patients who underwent interval appendectomy or incidental to other procedures were excluded. The two groups were compared in terms of patient demographics, pathological findings, operative time, postoperative course, and outcome. Results Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 101 patients while open appendectomy was done in 121 patients. There were no statistical differences between both groups regarding operative time, blood loss, time for oral intake resumption, hospital stay, or postoperative complications. Despite being not statistically significant, surgical site infection was lower in G1 as compared to G2 (3% versus 8.3%, p=0.09). Narcotic use was significantly less following laparoscopic appendectomy. In the late settings cases of G1, there was a relatively improved mean operative time (32.7 ±18.3) when compared to early settings appendectomy (62.4±26.3), which was statistically significant (

Indexed as

appendectomyappendicitislaparoscopyoutcomesecondary referral settings

Identifiers

PMID39687811
PMCPMC11647383

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.