학술논문

Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Document Type
Article
Source
Surgical Endoscopy & Other Interventional Techniques. Apr2024, Vol. 38 Issue 4, p1667-1684. 18p.
Subject
*APPENDECTOMY
*LAPAROSCOPIC surgery
*POSTOPERATIVE pain
*META-analysis
*RANDOMIZED controlled trials
*APPENDICITIS
*DESCRIPTIVE statistics
*SYSTEMATIC reviews
*SURGICAL complications
*SURGICAL site infections
*QUALITY assurance
*CONFIDENCE intervals
*LENGTH of stay in hospitals
Language
ISSN
1866-6817
Abstract
Background: Conventional three-access laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) is currently the gold standard treatment, however, Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) has been proposed as an alternative. The aim of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate safety and efficacy of SILA compared with conventional approach. Methods: Per PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CLA vs SILA for acute appendicitis. The randomised Mantel–Haenszel method was used for the meta-analysis. Statistical data analysis was performed with the Review Manager software and the risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane "Risk of Bias" assessment tool. Results: Twenty-one studies (RCTs) were selected (2646 patients). The operative time was significantly longer in the SILA group (MD = 7,32), confirmed in both paediatric (MD = 9,80), (Q = 1,47) and adult subgroups (MD = 5,92), (Q = 55,85). Overall postoperative morbidity was higher in patients who underwent SILA, but the result was not statistically significant. In SILA group were assessed shorter hospital stays, fewer wound infections and higher conversion rate, but the results were not statistically significant. Meta-analysis was not performed about cosmetics of skin scars and postoperative pain because different scales were used in each study. Conclusions: This analysis show that SILA, although associated with fewer postoperative wound infection, has a significantly longer operative time. Furthermore, the risk of postoperative general complications is still present. Further studies will be required to analyse outcomes related to postoperative pain and the cosmetics of the surgical scar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online Access