SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025
Single-port vs multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. 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.
- Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of transumbilical single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsSingle-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is a promising alternative to multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for emergency appendectomy, with potential advantages in cosmesis and recovery. However, its role remains uncertain, particularly in complex cases. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates SPLS's safety, effectiveness, and recent advancements to inform clinical decisions and practice.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library identified studies comparing SPLS with MPLS in emergency appendectomy. Outcomes included conversion to open surgery, operative time, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, pain outcomes, and cosmetic satisfaction. Data synthesis followed PRISMA guidelines using a random-effects model.
resultsEleven studies, including randomized controlled trials and cohort studies, were included. No significant differences were observed in conversion rates (OR 1.78, 95% CI: 0.63-5.03), complication rates (OR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.63-1.46), operative time (mean difference 2.93 min, 95% CI: - 3.17 to 9.02), length of stay (mean difference - 0.23 days, 95% CI: - 0.62 to 0.15), or postoperative pain (mean difference - 0.24, 95% CI: - 0.96 to 0.49). Substantial heterogeneity was present for operative time (I
conclusionWhile SPLS appears to be a safe and feasible alternative to MPLS for emergency appendectomy, current evidence does not support definitive equivalence across all outcomes due to significant heterogeneity, small study sizes, and inconsistent measurement tools. Future large-scale randomized trials are necessary to clarify SPLS's role, especially in complex cases and high-risk populations.
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.