ReviewCureus2025
Endoloop Versus Metallic Clip for Stump Closure in Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Appendectomy is the treatment of choice for most cases of acute appendicitis, and, considering that the availability of technical variables for closing the appendicular stump raises questions for surgeons, analyzing which closure method provides the best results is necessary. This study aims to compare the variables of operating time, readmission rate, reoperation, and surgical wound infection regarding the endoloop and metallic clip techniques for closing the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy. Only randomized clinical trials that compared metallic clip and endoloop appendicular stump closing in laparoscopic appendectomy were used. Of these, those that did not fit the PICOT (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time) question and inclusion criteria were excluded, with five articles being included for the analysis phase. Five randomized clinical trials were included in the statistical analysis, totaling a population of 344 patients, with 181 patients in the metal clip group. It was observed that the operation time was significantly shorter in the metal clip group (STD -0.81, 95% CI: -1.13, -0.49, p < 0.00001, I² = 50%). To the extent that the reoperation rate (RR 1.27, 95% CI: 0.20, 7.88, p = 0.80, I² = 0%), the readmission rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.29, 2.91, p = 0.89, I² = 0%), and the surgical wound infection rate (RR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.24, 3.13, p = 0.83, I² = 0%) were statistically similar between the two groups. The findings of this study demonstrate that the closure of the appendicular stump using metal clips in laparoscopic appendectomy is faster, with similar rates of readmission, reoperation, and surgical wound infection between the two groups.
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.