Authors' reply to: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical Endoscopy

Volumn 26, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 3000-3001

  Markar, Sheraz ^a   Kinross, James ^a  

^a ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BILE LEAKAGE; CHOLECYSTECTOMY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; HUMAN; INCISION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LETTER; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL RISK; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SURGICAL WOUND; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

EID: 84871620015     PISSN: 09302794     EISSN: 14322218     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2267-7     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Garg P, Tharani S, Thakur JD (2012) Cosmetic outcome is an important parameter when comparing single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). Surg Endosc 26. doi:10.1007/s00464-012-2265-9
2. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Thrumurthy S, Muirhead L, Kinross J, Paraskeva P (2012) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-011-2051-0
3. Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y, Okuda J, Tanigawa N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98(7):991-995
4. Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT, Lee PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97(7):1007-1012