ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2025
The efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in the surgical management of ectopic pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 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
To compare the efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the surgical management of ectopic pregnancy through a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases from inception to May, 2023 for studies comparing SILS with CLS in ectopic pregnancy treatment. Included studies were controlled and observational, excluding single-arm studies, meta-analyses, and reviews. Quality was assessed using ROBINS-I for observational studies and the Cochrane tool for randomized trials. Data were analyzed with OpenMetaAnalyst and Review Manager 5.4.1, using odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. Twelve studies involving 880 women (372 SILS, 508 CLS) were included. SILS showed significantly less blood loss (MD=-51.01 mL, p=0.004), shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-0.24 days, p=0.003), and faster return of bowel function (MD=-1.03 hours, p<0.01), compared to CLS. No significant differences were found in total operative time, hemoglobin change, blood transfusion requirements, or number of patients needing transfusions. Patient satisfaction data were limited but suggested better cosmetic outcomes with SILS. SILS is a feasible and effective alternative to CLS for ectopic pregnancy, offering reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and quicker bowel function recovery. These benefits, alongside potential cosmetic advantages, make SILS a promising option, particularly for young women. Further research is needed to confirm long-term outcomes and optimize patient selection.
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.