Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Purpose To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V). Methods A literature search was performed using The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Googl...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | SpringerPlus 2016-09, Vol.5 (1), p.1483-1483, Article 1483 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1483 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1483 |
container_title | SpringerPlus |
container_volume | 5 |
creator | Wu, Tao Duan, Xi Yang, Xuesong Deng, Xianzhong Cui, Shu |
description | Purpose
To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V).
Methods
A literature search was performed using The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Google Scholar. Literature reviewed included meta-analyses, and randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies. We utilized weight mean difference (WMD) to measure hospital stay, time to return normal activity, postoperative pain and improvement of semen parameters and odds ratio (OR) to postoperative complications and cosmetic satisfaction. We used the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.1 software for statistical analysis.
Results
We identified six publications which strictly met our eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that LESS-V was better than CTL-V in postoperative pain (WMD: −0.46; 95 % CI −0.75 to −0.17; p = 0.002), time to convalescence (WMD: −1.4 days; 95 % CI −2.55 to −0.25; p = 0.02) and cosmetic satisfaction (OR 6.86; 95 % CI 2.89–16.28; p |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s40064-016-3178-1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5011471</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1822468901</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-17c411e1050bdc53d303bb64b26b48fc2b1e1cc12026630c24c9cfdc8f0b6c343</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQhiNERavSH8AFReLCJTBjO47DAQlVLSCtxKWcLWfibF0l8WInW-XMH8dh22pBQsIXf8wzr8evJ8teIbxDVPJ9FABSFICy4FipAp9lZwxrXqACfH60Ps0uYryDNGSFooIX2SmrZMmgrM6ynxuzM8HbsfWR_M5RHt247W0R3WTzvQmOPNne0uSHJSc_JNq2-b2bbtNu3Ntxcn40fd7_1nnUmMPWhuVDbvK4xMkOZkqnwe6dvc_N2OaDnUxhUt4SXXyZnXSmj_biYT7Pvl9f3Vx-KTbfPn-9_LQpqAQ-FViRQLQIJTQtlbzlwJtGiobJRqiOWJOCRMiAScmBmKCaupZUB40kLvh59vGgu5ubwbaUag-m17vgBhMW7Y3Tf0ZGd6u3fq9LwGQcJoG3DwLB_5htnPTgYnKnN6P1c9SoWFVDXSv-PygTUtWwqr75C73zc0jerJRQNSKrWaLwQFFyOQbbPdWNoNeG0IeG0Kkh9NoQelV-ffzgp4zH708AOwAxhcb0ZUdX_1P1F198xCc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1848911292</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Springer Nature OA/Free Journals</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Wu, Tao ; Duan, Xi ; Yang, Xuesong ; Deng, Xianzhong ; Cui, Shu</creator><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tao ; Duan, Xi ; Yang, Xuesong ; Deng, Xianzhong ; Cui, Shu</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V).
Methods
A literature search was performed using The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Google Scholar. Literature reviewed included meta-analyses, and randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies. We utilized weight mean difference (WMD) to measure hospital stay, time to return normal activity, postoperative pain and improvement of semen parameters and odds ratio (OR) to postoperative complications and cosmetic satisfaction. We used the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.1 software for statistical analysis.
Results
We identified six publications which strictly met our eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that LESS-V was better than CTL-V in postoperative pain (WMD: −0.46; 95 % CI −0.75 to −0.17; p = 0.002), time to convalescence (WMD: −1.4 days; 95 % CI −2.55 to −0.25; p = 0.02) and cosmetic satisfaction (OR 6.86; 95 % CI 2.89–16.28; p < 0.00001). However, CTL-V was better than LESS-V in operative time (WMD 1.96 min, 95 % CI 0.96–2.96; p = 0.0001). There were no differences between LESS-V and CTL-V in hospital stay (WMD: −0.02 days, 95 % CI −0.39 to 0.35; p = 0.92) and postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95 % CI 0.57–2.21; p = 0.73).
Conclusions
This meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of LESS-V and CTL-V showed that LESS-V was safe, with significantly reduced postoperative pain, shorter recovery time, and better cosmetic outcome.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2193-1801</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2193-1801</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-3178-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27652057</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences ; Medicine ; multidisciplinary ; Review ; Science ; Science (multidisciplinary) ; Urology</subject><ispartof>SpringerPlus, 2016-09, Vol.5 (1), p.1483-1483, Article 1483</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2016</rights><rights>SpringerPlus is a copyright of Springer, 2016.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-17c411e1050bdc53d303bb64b26b48fc2b1e1cc12026630c24c9cfdc8f0b6c343</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-17c411e1050bdc53d303bb64b26b48fc2b1e1cc12026630c24c9cfdc8f0b6c343</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5011471/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5011471/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,313,314,727,780,784,792,885,27921,27923,27924,41119,42188,51575,53790,53792</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27652057$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duan, Xi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Xuesong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Xianzhong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cui, Shu</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>SpringerPlus</title><addtitle>SpringerPlus</addtitle><addtitle>Springerplus</addtitle><description>Purpose
To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V).
Methods
A literature search was performed using The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Google Scholar. Literature reviewed included meta-analyses, and randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies. We utilized weight mean difference (WMD) to measure hospital stay, time to return normal activity, postoperative pain and improvement of semen parameters and odds ratio (OR) to postoperative complications and cosmetic satisfaction. We used the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.1 software for statistical analysis.
Results
We identified six publications which strictly met our eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that LESS-V was better than CTL-V in postoperative pain (WMD: −0.46; 95 % CI −0.75 to −0.17; p = 0.002), time to convalescence (WMD: −1.4 days; 95 % CI −2.55 to −0.25; p = 0.02) and cosmetic satisfaction (OR 6.86; 95 % CI 2.89–16.28; p < 0.00001). However, CTL-V was better than LESS-V in operative time (WMD 1.96 min, 95 % CI 0.96–2.96; p = 0.0001). There were no differences between LESS-V and CTL-V in hospital stay (WMD: −0.02 days, 95 % CI −0.39 to 0.35; p = 0.92) and postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95 % CI 0.57–2.21; p = 0.73).
Conclusions
This meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of LESS-V and CTL-V showed that LESS-V was safe, with significantly reduced postoperative pain, shorter recovery time, and better cosmetic outcome.</description><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>multidisciplinary</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Science (multidisciplinary)</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>2193-1801</issn><issn>2193-1801</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQhiNERavSH8AFReLCJTBjO47DAQlVLSCtxKWcLWfibF0l8WInW-XMH8dh22pBQsIXf8wzr8evJ8teIbxDVPJ9FABSFICy4FipAp9lZwxrXqACfH60Ps0uYryDNGSFooIX2SmrZMmgrM6ynxuzM8HbsfWR_M5RHt247W0R3WTzvQmOPNne0uSHJSc_JNq2-b2bbtNu3Ntxcn40fd7_1nnUmMPWhuVDbvK4xMkOZkqnwe6dvc_N2OaDnUxhUt4SXXyZnXSmj_biYT7Pvl9f3Vx-KTbfPn-9_LQpqAQ-FViRQLQIJTQtlbzlwJtGiobJRqiOWJOCRMiAScmBmKCaupZUB40kLvh59vGgu5ubwbaUag-m17vgBhMW7Y3Tf0ZGd6u3fq9LwGQcJoG3DwLB_5htnPTgYnKnN6P1c9SoWFVDXSv-PygTUtWwqr75C73zc0jerJRQNSKrWaLwQFFyOQbbPdWNoNeG0IeG0Kkh9NoQelV-ffzgp4zH708AOwAxhcb0ZUdX_1P1F198xCc</recordid><startdate>20160905</startdate><enddate>20160905</enddate><creator>Wu, Tao</creator><creator>Duan, Xi</creator><creator>Yang, Xuesong</creator><creator>Deng, Xianzhong</creator><creator>Cui, Shu</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160905</creationdate><title>Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Wu, Tao ; Duan, Xi ; Yang, Xuesong ; Deng, Xianzhong ; Cui, Shu</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-17c411e1050bdc53d303bb64b26b48fc2b1e1cc12026630c24c9cfdc8f0b6c343</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>multidisciplinary</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Science (multidisciplinary)</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duan, Xi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Xuesong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Xianzhong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cui, Shu</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA/Free Journals</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>SpringerPlus</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wu, Tao</au><au>Duan, Xi</au><au>Yang, Xuesong</au><au>Deng, Xianzhong</au><au>Cui, Shu</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>SpringerPlus</jtitle><stitle>SpringerPlus</stitle><addtitle>Springerplus</addtitle><date>2016-09-05</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1483</spage><epage>1483</epage><pages>1483-1483</pages><artnum>1483</artnum><issn>2193-1801</issn><eissn>2193-1801</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V).
Methods
A literature search was performed using The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Google Scholar. Literature reviewed included meta-analyses, and randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies. We utilized weight mean difference (WMD) to measure hospital stay, time to return normal activity, postoperative pain and improvement of semen parameters and odds ratio (OR) to postoperative complications and cosmetic satisfaction. We used the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.1 software for statistical analysis.
Results
We identified six publications which strictly met our eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that LESS-V was better than CTL-V in postoperative pain (WMD: −0.46; 95 % CI −0.75 to −0.17; p = 0.002), time to convalescence (WMD: −1.4 days; 95 % CI −2.55 to −0.25; p = 0.02) and cosmetic satisfaction (OR 6.86; 95 % CI 2.89–16.28; p < 0.00001). However, CTL-V was better than LESS-V in operative time (WMD 1.96 min, 95 % CI 0.96–2.96; p = 0.0001). There were no differences between LESS-V and CTL-V in hospital stay (WMD: −0.02 days, 95 % CI −0.39 to 0.35; p = 0.92) and postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95 % CI 0.57–2.21; p = 0.73).
Conclusions
This meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of LESS-V and CTL-V showed that LESS-V was safe, with significantly reduced postoperative pain, shorter recovery time, and better cosmetic outcome.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>27652057</pmid><doi>10.1186/s40064-016-3178-1</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2193-1801 |
ispartof | SpringerPlus, 2016-09, Vol.5 (1), p.1483-1483, Article 1483 |
issn | 2193-1801 2193-1801 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5011471 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central; Springer Nature OA/Free Journals; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Humanities and Social Sciences Medicine multidisciplinary Review Science Science (multidisciplinary) Urology |
title | Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T07%3A27%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoendoscopic%20single-site%20varicocelectomy%20compared%20with%20conventional%20laparoscopic%20surgery:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=SpringerPlus&rft.au=Wu,%20Tao&rft.date=2016-09-05&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1483&rft.epage=1483&rft.pages=1483-1483&rft.artnum=1483&rft.issn=2193-1801&rft.eissn=2193-1801&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s40064-016-3178-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1822468901%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1848911292&rft_id=info:pmid/27652057&rfr_iscdi=true |