We have located links that may give you full text access.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
[Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for adult acute appendicitis: a Meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials].
Zhong Nan da Xue Xue Bao. Yi Xue Ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical Sciences 2014 December
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency and safety for single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).
METHODS: The literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning SILA versus CLA was retrieved by searching the electronic databases from the inception date to May 2014. Methodological quality of the included trials was assessed by using the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook criteria, and the data were extracted and subjected to Meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.1 analysis software.
RESULTS: A total of 1 183 patients were finally selected after the screening. Among them, 582 cases underwent SILA and 601 cases underwent CLA. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that SILA was associated with higher conversion rate (RR=4.38, 95% CI 1.96-9.79, Z=3.59, P=0.0003), longer operative time (RR=4.83, 95% CI 1.57-8.09, Z=2.90, P=0.004), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD=?0.11, 95%CI ?0.21-?0.01, Z=2.02, P=0.04), and better scores for the postoperative appearance of incision (WMD=0.94, 95%CI 0.49-1.40, Z=4.06, P< 0.001) compared with CLA; no significant difference was observed in postoperative complications and postoperative pain scores (RR=1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.45, Z=0.18, P=0.86; WMD=?0.19, 95%CI ?0.59-0.20, Z=0.95, P=0.34) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: For patients under the conditions of the strict selection, SILA is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of adult acute appendicitis, especially apply to those who care about incision appearance.
METHODS: The literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning SILA versus CLA was retrieved by searching the electronic databases from the inception date to May 2014. Methodological quality of the included trials was assessed by using the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook criteria, and the data were extracted and subjected to Meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.1 analysis software.
RESULTS: A total of 1 183 patients were finally selected after the screening. Among them, 582 cases underwent SILA and 601 cases underwent CLA. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that SILA was associated with higher conversion rate (RR=4.38, 95% CI 1.96-9.79, Z=3.59, P=0.0003), longer operative time (RR=4.83, 95% CI 1.57-8.09, Z=2.90, P=0.004), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD=?0.11, 95%CI ?0.21-?0.01, Z=2.02, P=0.04), and better scores for the postoperative appearance of incision (WMD=0.94, 95%CI 0.49-1.40, Z=4.06, P< 0.001) compared with CLA; no significant difference was observed in postoperative complications and postoperative pain scores (RR=1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.45, Z=0.18, P=0.86; WMD=?0.19, 95%CI ?0.59-0.20, Z=0.95, P=0.34) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: For patients under the conditions of the strict selection, SILA is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of adult acute appendicitis, especially apply to those who care about incision appearance.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app