Cargando…
Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) have been the two main successful mini-invasive surgical interventions for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5568361/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28830403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x |
_version_ | 1783258847808323584 |
---|---|
author | Tan, Xuan Wang, Guobin Tang, Yong Bai, Jie Tao, Kaixiong Ye, Lin |
author_facet | Tan, Xuan Wang, Guobin Tang, Yong Bai, Jie Tao, Kaixiong Ye, Lin |
author_sort | Tan, Xuan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) have been the two main successful mini-invasive surgical interventions for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the two treatment alternatives. METHODS: We searched PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane library for trials that compared MLC and SILC. Risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-randomized comparative studies (nRCSs) involving 2764 patients were identified. A longer operating time (MD -10.49; 95% CI -18.10, −2.88; P = 0.007) and a shorter wound length (MD 3.65; 95% CI 0.51, 6.78; P = 0.02) were found to be associated with SILC compared with MLC. No significant differences were revealed in conversion, hospital stay, pain relief and cosmetic results. Although a lower incidence of complications was observed with MLC (8.2%) compared with SILC (15.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant (RD -0.06; 95% CI -0.12, 0.00; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: MLC has an advantage over SILC in terms of operating time rather than hospital stay, pain relief, cosmetic results. Though conversion and complication rates were higher with SILC, there existed no statistically differences in the two measures between the two procedures. Whether MLC confers any benefits in terms of conversion or complications still warrants further studies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5568361 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55683612017-08-29 Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review Tan, Xuan Wang, Guobin Tang, Yong Bai, Jie Tao, Kaixiong Ye, Lin BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) have been the two main successful mini-invasive surgical interventions for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the two treatment alternatives. METHODS: We searched PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane library for trials that compared MLC and SILC. Risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-randomized comparative studies (nRCSs) involving 2764 patients were identified. A longer operating time (MD -10.49; 95% CI -18.10, −2.88; P = 0.007) and a shorter wound length (MD 3.65; 95% CI 0.51, 6.78; P = 0.02) were found to be associated with SILC compared with MLC. No significant differences were revealed in conversion, hospital stay, pain relief and cosmetic results. Although a lower incidence of complications was observed with MLC (8.2%) compared with SILC (15.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant (RD -0.06; 95% CI -0.12, 0.00; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: MLC has an advantage over SILC in terms of operating time rather than hospital stay, pain relief, cosmetic results. Though conversion and complication rates were higher with SILC, there existed no statistically differences in the two measures between the two procedures. Whether MLC confers any benefits in terms of conversion or complications still warrants further studies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5568361/ /pubmed/28830403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Tan, Xuan Wang, Guobin Tang, Yong Bai, Jie Tao, Kaixiong Ye, Lin Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title | Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full | Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_fullStr | Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_short | Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_sort | minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5568361/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28830403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tanxuan minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT wangguobin minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT tangyong minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT baijie minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT taokaixiong minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT yelin minilaparoscopicversussingleincisioncholecystectomyforthetreatmentofcholecystolithiasisametaanalysisandsystematicreview |