These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Author: Xue C, Lin B, Huang Z, Chen Z.
    Journal: Surg Today; 2015 Sep; 45(9):1179-86. PubMed ID: 25539980.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy (3-port LA) for appendectomy. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Springer link, and the Cochrane library databases up to April, 2014, for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were pooled by weighted mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We found 11 RCTs, with a collective total of 731 patients treated with SILA and 725 patients treated with 3-point LA. Results indicated no significant differences between SILA and 3-port LA in primary outcomes, including wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, and total postoperative complications, and some secondary outcomes, including postoperative pain scores and length of hospital stay. However, SILA was associated with significantly longer operative times (WMD = 6.78, 95% CI = 3.78-9.79, P < 0.00001) and higher doses of analgesia (WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.45-1.47, P = 0.0002) than the 3-port LA. CONCLUSION: Although there was no significant difference in the safety of SILA vs. that of 3-port LA, our findings do not support the application of SILA because of its significantly longer operative times and the higher doses of analgesia required compared with those for 3-point LA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]