Single incision transumbilical laparoscopic varicocelectomy versus the conventional laparoscopic technique: A randomized clinical study

Youssef, Tamer; Abdalla, Emad

doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.048

Cited by 20 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 1 depicts the study characteristics and methodology for the six studies included in the systematic review (Bansal et al 2014; Friedersdorff et al 2013; Lee et al 2012; Marte et al 2014; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015). Among these, three were randomized controlled trials (level of evidence 2b) (Lee et al 2012; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among these, three were randomized controlled trials (level of evidence 2b) (Lee et al 2012; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015). Another three were retrospective case control studies (level of evidence 3b–4) (Bansal et al 2014; Friedersdorff et al 2013; Marte et al 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2a). Five studies including 417 patients evaluated postoperative pain using the VAS at different time points, ranging from the first postoperative day to the day of discharge (Friedersdorff et al 2013; Lee et al 2012; Marte et al 2014; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015). Because of the difference of evaluating time points, the subgroup analysis was performed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3a), suggesting that there is no significantly difference between LESS-V and CTL-V for hospital stay. Three trials reported time to convalescence in 249 patients (124 for LESS-V and 125 for CTL-V) (Lee et al 2012; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015). The pooled data showed a significant difference favoring the LESS-V group (WMD: −1.4; 95 % CI −2.55 to −0.25; p = 0.02; Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since then, more and more case reports and control studies comparing LESS with conventional laparoscopy have increased. Even though several studies comparing LESS-V and conventional laparoscopic varicocelectomy (CTL-V) have been reported, most are small series with conflicting results (Bansal et al 2014; Friedersdorff et al 2013; Lee et al 2012; Marte et al 2014; Wang et al 2014; Youssef and Abdalla 2015). It is still uncertain whether the benefits of LESS-V are restricted to improved fertility and are superior to CTL-V. Our goal is to therefore systemically search and analyze the available literature to conduct a meta-analysis of these studies to compare LESS-V–CTL-V.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Laparoendoscopic single-site varicocelectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Duan

Yang

et al. 2016

SpringerPlus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing laparoendoscopics single-site varicocelectomy (LESS-V) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CTL-V).MethodsA 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.ResultsWe 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).ConclusionsThis 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.

show abstract