Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Single-incision versus three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Xu, A-Man; Huang, Lei; Li, Tuan-Jie.
Afiliación
  • Xu AM; Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, No. 218, Jixi Rd, Hefei, 230022, China.
Surg Endosc ; 29(4): 822-43, 2015 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25106718
BACKGROUND: Three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TPLA) has been shown superior to open appendectomy for acute appendicitis (AA); alternatively, single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is gaining popularity. The choice between SILA and traditional TPLA remains controversial. This meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare efficacy and safety of SILA with TPLA for AA. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs comparing SILA with TPLA. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were operative time, postoperative complications, hospital duration, and days back to normal activities. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and relative risks (RRs) according to type of data. Methodological quality was evaluated to assess bias risk. RESULTS: A total of 8 distinct RCTs comparing SILA (n = 616) with TPLA (n = 618) published from 2010 to 2013 were identified in our analysis. SILA took longer to conduct than TPLA (43 vs 38, WMD: 5.96, 95 % CI 2.54-9.38, P = 0.0006). Patients undergoing SILA needed more extra trocars addressed during operation (7 % vs 0 %, RR: 12.36, 95 % CI 3.83-39.90, P < 0.0001), but could return to full activities earlier (6 vs 7, WMD: -0.68, 95 % CI -1.10 to -0.26, P = 0.001). However, these differences were not clinically significant. All other parameters were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide level 1a support for the clinical similarity that SILA is basically as feasible, effective and safe as TPLA when dealing with AA, although statistically, SILA takes longer to perform, requires more extra trocars, and benefits patients with faster recovery compared with TPLA. Further RCTs are needed to update our finding with advancement of surgical techniques and skills.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Apendicectomía / Apendicitis / Laparoscopía Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Surg Endosc Asunto de la revista: DIAGNOSTICO POR IMAGEM / GASTROENTEROLOGIA Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China Pais de publicación: Alemania

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Apendicectomía / Apendicitis / Laparoscopía Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Surg Endosc Asunto de la revista: DIAGNOSTICO POR IMAGEM / GASTROENTEROLOGIA Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China Pais de publicación: Alemania