Home > DARE Reviews > Single-incision versus conventional...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].

Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Review published: 2014.

Bibliographic details: Hua J, Gong J, Xu B, Yang T, Song Z.  Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2014; 18(2): 426-436. [PubMed: 24002764]

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) has gained enormous popularity worldwide. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess feasibility, safety, and benefits of SILA as compared with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS: A literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Primary outcome measures were total postoperative complications, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, and ileus. Secondary outcome measures were operative time, length of hospital stay, pain scores, conversion rate, reoperation rate, and time to return to normal activity.

RESULTS: Eight RCTs, totaling 1,211 patients (604 for SILA and 607 for CLA), met the inclusion criteria. The incidences of total postoperative complications, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, and ileus were statistically similar between the SILA and CLA groups. Compared with CLA, SILA was associated with a significantly longer operative time (weighted mean difference = 5.28 min; 95 % confidence interval = 3.61 to 6.94). Time to return to normal activity was shorter in the SILA group (by 0.69 days). Length of hospital stay, pain scores, conversion rate, and reoperation rate were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION: SILA is feasible and safe with no obvious advantages over CLA. Therefore, it may be considered as an alternative to CLA.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2014 University of York.

PMID: 24002764

Download

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...