首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>World Journal of Gastroenterology >Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis
【2h】

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:单切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术与常规腹腔镜阑尾切除术:系统评价和荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

AIM: To assess the differences in clinical benefits and disadvantages of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were electronically searched up through January 2013 to identify randomized controlled trails (RCTs) comparing SILA with CLA. Data was extracted from eligible studies to evaluate the pooled outcome effects for the total of 1068 patients. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.2.0. For dichotomous data and continuous data, the risk ratio (RR) and the mean difference (MD) were calculated, respectively, with 95%CI for both. For continuous outcomes with different measurement scales in different RCTs, the standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated with 95%CI. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed when necessary.RESULTS: Six RCTs were identified that compared SILA (n = 535) with CLA (n = 533). Five RCTs had a high risk of bias and one RCT had a low risk of bias. SILA was associated with longer operative time (MD = 5.68, 95%CI: 3.91-7.46, P < 0.00001), higher conversion rate (RR = 5.14, 95%CI: 1.25-21.10, P = 0.03) and better cosmetic satisfaction score (MD = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.30-0.73, P < 0.00001) compared with CLA. No significant differences were found for total complications (RR = 1.15, 95%CI: 0.76-1.75, P = 0.51), drain insertion (RR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.41-1.25, P = 0.24), or length of hospital stay (SMD = 0.04, 95%CI: -0.08-0.16, P = 0.57). Because there was not enough data among the analyzed RCTs, postoperative pain was not calculated.CONCLUSION: The benefit of SILA is cosmetic satisfaction, while the disadvantages of SILA are longer operative time and higher conversion rate.
机译:目的:评估单切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术(SILA)和常规腹腔镜阑尾切除术(CLA)在临床上的优缺点的差异。方法:电子化Cochrane图书馆,MEDLINE,Embase,Science Citation Index和中国生物医学文献数据库搜索到2013年1月,以确定SILA和CLA进行比较的随机对照试验(RCT)。从符合条件的研究中提取数据,以评估总计1068例患者的合并结果效果。使用Review Manager 5.2.0进行荟萃分析。对于二分数据和连续数据,分别计算了风险比(RR)和均值差(MD),两者均为95%CI。对于在不同RCT中具有不同测量范围的连续结果,使用95%CI计算标准均值(SMD)。结果:确定了六个RCT,将SILA(n = 535)与CLA(n = 533)进行了比较。 5个RCT具有较高的偏倚风险,而1个RCT具有较低的偏倚风险。 SILA与手术时间更长(MD = 5.68,95%CI:3.91-7.46,P <0.00001),更高的转化率(RR = 5.14,95%CI:1.25-21.10,P = 0.03)和美容满意度更高有关。 (C = 0.52,95%CI:0.30-0.73,P <0.00001)。总并发症(RR = 1.15,95%CI:0.76-1.75,P = 0.51),引流管插入(RR = 0.72,95%CI:0.41-1.25,P = 0.24)或住院时间没有显着差异停留时间(SMD = 0.04,95%CI:-0.08-0.16,P = 0.57)。由于所分析的随机对照试验中尚无足够的数据,因此无法计算出术后疼痛。结论:SILA的好处是美容效果令人满意,而SILA的缺点是手术时间更长,转化率更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号