Single Incision versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

被引:33
作者
Geng, Liangyuan [1 ]
Sun, Changhua [1 ]
Bai, Jianfeng [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Gen Surg, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
关键词
CLINICAL-TRIAL; PORT; SURGERY; PAIN; SITE; SCORES;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0076530
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: Previous meta-analyses that compared the outcome of SILC and CLC have not presented consistent conclusions. This meta-analysis was performed after adding many recent RCTs, to clarify this issue. Methods: Relevant articles published in English were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register from January 1997 to February 2013. Reference lists of the retrieved articles were reviewed to identify additional articles. Primary outcomes (postoperative pain scores, cosmetic score, and length of incision) and secondary outcomes (operating time, blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, time to initial oral intake, and time to resume work) were pooled. Quantitative variables were calculated using the weighted mean difference (WMD), and qualitative variables were pooled using odds ratios (OR). Results: 25 appropriate RCTs were identified from 2128 published articles. 1841 patients were treated, 944 with SILC and 897 with CLC. SILC was superior to CLC in cosmetic score (WMD = 1.155, P<0.001), shorter length of incision (WMD = -3.285, P = 0.029), and postoperative pain within 12 h (VAS in 3-4 h, WMD = -0.704, P = 0.026; VAS in 6-8 h, WMD = -0.613, P = 0.010). CLC was superior to SILC in operating time (OT) (WMD = 13.613, P<0.001) and need of additional instruments (OR = 7.448, P<0.001). Other secondary outcomes were similar. Conclusions: SILC offered a better cosmetic result and less postoperative pain for patients with uncomplicated cholelithiasis or polypoid lesions of the gallbladder. However, SILC was associated with a longer OT and required additional instruments.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], COCHRANE DATABASE SY
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2010, J SURG PAKISTAN INT
[3]  
[Anonymous], SURG ENDOSC
[4]   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
[5]   Is single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy safe? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Arezzo, Alberto ;
Scozzari, Gitana ;
Famiglietti, Federico ;
Passera, Roberto ;
Morino, Mario .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2013, 27 (07) :2293-2304
[6]   Elective transumbilical compared with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Bresadola, F ;
Pasqualucci, A ;
Donini, A ;
Chiarandini, P ;
Anania, G ;
Terrosu, G ;
Sistu, MA ;
Pasetto, P .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1999, 165 (01) :29-34
[7]   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
[8]   Transumbilical Single-Port Surgery: Evolution and Current Status [J].
Canes, David ;
Desai, Mihir M. ;
Aron, Monish ;
Haber, Georges-Pascal ;
Goel, Raj K. ;
Stein, Robert J. ;
Kaouk, Jihad H. ;
Gill, Inderbir S. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2008, 54 (05) :1020-1030
[9]  
Cantore F, 2008, Int J Surg, V6 Suppl 1, pS89, DOI 10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.12.033
[10]   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