Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

被引:74
作者
Sajid, Muhammad S. [1 ]
Ladwa, Nikhil [1 ]
Kalra, Lorain [1 ]
Hutson, Kristian K. [1 ]
Singh, Krishna K. [1 ]
Sayegh, Mazin [1 ]
机构
[1] Worthing Dist Hosp, Dept Upper Gastrointestinal & Hepatobiliary Surg, Worthing BN11 2DH, W Sussex, England
关键词
ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY; GENERAL-SURGERY; CLINICAL-TRIALS; SITE; QUALITY; 2-PORT; ACCESS; 3-PORT; SILS;
D O I
10.1007/s00268-012-1719-5
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
100210 [外科学];
摘要
The objective of this study was to analyze systematically the randomized, controlled trials that compared single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUORUM) standards. The included studies were analyzed systematically using the statistical software package RevMan. The summated outcomes were expressed as the risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous variables and standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables. Eleven randomized trials encompassing 858 patients were retrieved from the electronic databases. In the random effects model, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, cosmesis score, conversion rate, and time to return to normal activities were statistically comparable between the two cholecystectomy techniques. SILC was associated with a longer operating time [SMD 0.71; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.38, 1.05; z = 4.18; p < 0.0001) and an increased requirement for additional port insertion (RR 6.54; 95 % CI 2.19, 19.57; z = 3.36; p < 0008). However, there was significant heterogeneity among the trials. SILC does not offer any advantage over CLC for treating benign gallbladder disorders. CLC may be used assiduously for this purpose.
引用
收藏
页码:2644 / 2653
页数:10
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2008, Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.0
[2]
Laparoendoscopic Single Site (LESS) Versus Classic Video-Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Prospective Study [J].
Aprea, Giovanni ;
Bottazzi, Enrico Coppola ;
Guida, Francesco ;
Masone, Stefania ;
Persico, Giovanni .
JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2011, 166 (02) :E109-E112
[3]
Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain [J].
Asakuma, M. ;
Hayashi, M. ;
Komeda, K. ;
Shimizu, T. ;
Hirokawa, F. ;
Miyamoto, Y. ;
Okuda, J. ;
Tanigawa, N. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2011, 98 (07) :991-995
[4]
Randomized clinical trial of laparoendoscopic single-site versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Bucher, P. ;
Pugin, F. ;
Buchs, N. C. ;
Ostermann, S. ;
Morel, P. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2011, 98 (12) :1695-1702
[5]
Randomized Clinical Trial of Single-incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Short-term Operative Outcomes [J].
Cao, Zhan Guo ;
Cai, Wang ;
Qin, Ming Fang ;
Zhao, Hong Zhi ;
Yue, Ping ;
Li, Yang .
SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES, 2011, 21 (05) :311-313
[6]
Cerci C, 2007, HEPATO-GASTROENTEROL, V54, P15
[7]
A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF A RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIAL [J].
CHALMERS, TC ;
SMITH, H ;
BLACKBURN, B ;
SILVERMAN, B ;
SCHROEDER, B ;
REITMAN, D ;
AMBROZ, A .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1981, 2 (01) :31-49
[8]
A Comprehensive Review of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) and Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) Techniques for Cholecystectomy [J].
Chamberlain, Ronald Scott ;
Sakpal, Sujit Vijay .
JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2009, 13 (09) :1733-1740
[9]
Deeks J.J., 2008, Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context, Second Edition, P285, DOI [10.1002/9780470693926.ch15, DOI 10.1002/9780470693926.CH15]
[10]
METHODS FOR COMBINING RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIALS - STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS [J].
DEMETS, DL .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1987, 6 (03) :341-350