Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Meta-Analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Meta-Analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Meta-Analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Meta-Analysis
2020
Overview
BackgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SILSG) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG) in obese patients. This study aims to compare the surgical outcomes of these two techniques.MethodsA meta-analysis of existing literature obtained through a systematic literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library CENTRAL databases from 2009 to 2019 was conducted.ResultsEleven articles including 1168 patients were analyzed. Patients in the SILSG group reported greater satisfaction with cosmetic scar outcomes than those in the CLSG group (SMD = 2.47, 95% CI = 1.10 to 3.83, P = 0.00). There was no significant difference between the SILSG group and the CLSG group regarding operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, conversion rate, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative analgesia, postoperative complications, excess weight loss (EWL), and improvements in comorbidities (P > 0.05).ConclusionsCompared to CLSG, SILSG resulted in improved cosmetic satisfaction and showed no disadvantages in terms of surgical outcomes; thus, SILSG can serve as an alternative to CLSG for obese patients. Nonetheless, high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with large study populations and long follow-up periods are needed.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.