west china medical publishers
Keyword
  • Title
  • Author
  • Keyword
  • Abstract
Advance search
Advance search

Search

find Keyword "single-incision" 4 results
  • Effectiveness and safety of single-incision versus conventional multiple ports video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of single-incision video-assisted thoracic surgery versus conventional multiple ports video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer as well as providing reference for clinical decision-making. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang ect until March 2017 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing single-incision with conventional multiple ports video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer.Two reviewers independently screened and selected literatures according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then data extraction and quality assessment of included studies were conducted. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Results Twenty-six cohort studies (3 053 patients) were included. The quality of the included studies was high with score more than five.Meta-analysis showed that single-incision video-assisted thoracic surgery had shorter thoracic drainage time (MD=–0.71, 95% CI –1.03 to –0.39), shorter hospitalization time (MD=–0.92, 95% CI –1.66 to –0.19), lower pain scores 1 day after surgery (MD=–0.65, 95% CI –0.90 to –0.40), lower pain scores 3 days after surgery (MD=–0.90, 95% CI –1.16 to –0.64), lower pain scores 7 days after surgery (MD=–1.24, 95% CI –1.90 to –0.57), less number of lymph node dissection (MD=–0.72, 95% CI –1.35 to –0.10), less total drainage fluid (MD=–108.60, 95% CI –180.42 to –36.79) and shorter length of surgical incision (MD=–2.74, 95% CI –3.57 to –1.90) than conventional multiple ports video-assisted thoracic surgery. But the differences between the two groups in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications were not statistically significant. Conclusion Single-incision video-assisted thoracic surgery is safer and better in patient's compliance than conventional multiple ports video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer. But there is no significant difference in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, or postoperative complications. It still needs large-scale, high-quality studies to demonstrate its effectiveness and safety.

    Release date:2018-03-05 03:32 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Clinical efficacy of single-incision versus conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

    ObjectiveTo compare clinical efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in treatment of colorectal cancer.MethodsThe Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang Data were searched to collect the comparative study of the SILS and CLS in the treatment of colorectal cancer. The data were extracted and evaluated by the RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsEventually, 13 articles were included, including 3 randomized controlled trials and 10 case-control studies with a total of 1 466 patients. The meta-analysis results suggested that the SILS could shorten the postoperative hospital stay [MD=–0.63, 95% CI (–1.10, –0.16), P=0.009] and time to the first flatus [MD=–0.23, 95% CI (–0.33, –0.13), P<0.000 01] and the lymph node dissection was relatively completed [MD=0.77, 95% CI (0.05, 1.48), P=0.04] as compared with the CLS. In the total complications of surgery [OR=0.73, 95% CI (0.51, 1.03), P=0.08], operation time [MD=–0.33, 95% CI (–11.36, 10.69), P=0.95], intraoperative blood loss [MD=5.61, 95% CI (–4.20, 15.43), P=0.26], conversion to laparotomy [OR=1.06, 95% CI (0.18, 6.13), P=0.95], distance between tumor and proximal margin [MD=0.11, 95% CI (–0.48, 0.69), P=0.71], distance between tumor and distal margin [MD=0.32, 95% CI (–0.23, 0.87), P=0.25] had no statistically significant differences between the SILS and CLS.ConclusionsSILS is safe and effective for radical resection of colorectal cancer. However, results of study still need to be validated by a randomized controlled trial with a large sample designed strictly.

    Release date:2019-08-12 04:33 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Progress in single-incision laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer

    With the upgrading of minimally invasive surgical concepts and laparoscopic equipment for gastric cancer, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) had emerged as a new focus of research in gastric cancer surgery. SILS offered advantages such as reduced damage, superior cosmetic outcomes, decreased postoperative pain, and faster recovery as compared with traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy. However, its level of difficulty limited its further promotion and application. Although numerous studies supported the safety and feasibility of SILS, more high-level evidence-based medical research was required to endorse its widespread use. The author reviewed the development history, current status, and prospects of SILS laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery.

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Efficacy and safety of single-port, two-port, and three-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Single-incision thoracoscopic surgery (SITS) and two-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (2P-VATS) in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. Methods The databases of CNKI, PubMed, The Cochrane Libray, Web of Science, EMbase, Wanfang and Chinese Medical Association were searched by computer. Literature on SITS treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax from the establishment of the database to March 2023. The data are processed with RevMan 5.4.1. Results Finally, 107 studies were included, including 35 RCTs, 2 cohort studies, and 70 case-control studies. Meta analysis results show that compared to 2P-VATS and three port video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (3P-VATS), SITS had a shorter surgical time [SMD=–0.53, 95%CI (–0.90, –0.16), P=0.005], less intraoperative bleeding [SMD=–1.58, 95%CI (–1.93, –1.22), P<0.000 01; SMD=–1.59, 95%CI (–2.03,–1.14), P<0.000 01], shorter postoperative hospitalization time [SMD=–1.05, 95%CI (–1.29,–0.82), P<0.000 01; SMD=–1.08, 95%CI (–1.39,–0.77), P<0.000 01], and shorter postoperative drainage (catheterization) time [SMD=–0.75, 95%CI (–1.00,–0.50), P<0.000 01; SMD=–1.23, 95%CI (–1.72,–0.75), P<0.000 01], fewer postoperative complications [OR=0.34, 95%CI (0.26,0.45), P<0.000 01; OR=0.47, 95%CI (0.33,0.68), P<0.000 1], fewer postoperative recurrences [OR=0.50, 95%CI (0.33,0.75), P=0.000 8], and lighter postoperative pain [SMD=–1.71, 95%CI (–1.98,–1.45), P<0.000 01; SMD=–2.02, 95%CI (–2.46,–1.59), P<0.000 01]. Compared with 3P-VATS, 2P-VATS had less intraoperative bleeding [SMD=–1.02, 95%CI (–1.81,–0.22), P=0.01] , shorter postoperative hospitalization time [SMD=–0.59, 95%CI (–1.11,–0.06), P=0.03], shorter postoperative drainage (catheterization) time [SMD=–0.46, 95%CI (–0.85,–0.08), P=0.02], fewer postoperative complications [OR=0.36, 95%CI (0.22,0.59), P<0.000 1] , and lighter postoperative pain [SMD=–0.80, 95%CI (–1.08,–0.53), P<0.000 01]. Conclusion SITS and 2P-VATS are an effective and safe method for the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax and worthy of further promotion and application in clinical practice. Due to limitations in the quantity and quality of included studies, the above conclusions require more large-sample, high-quality studies to be verified.

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
1 pages Previous 1 Next

Format

Content