Li HJ, et al. – This study was performed with the aim to compare the short–term efficacy and safety of single–incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) with Conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for colorectal diseases (CRDs). Findings provide convincing support for the clinical similarity that SILS seemed basically as applicable, effective, and safe as CLS when dealing with colorectal lesions, but not for superiority.

Methods

• Authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for relevant randomized and prospective studies.
• They also screened reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases.
• Surgical parameters, postsurgical recovery, pain, and adverse events were assessed as outcome measures.
• They conducted meta–analysis where appropriate, comparing items using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) according to data type.

Results

• Authors identified a total of nine prospective (three randomized and six non–randomized) researches published from 2011 to 2015.
• As per overall pooled results, SILS in comparison to CLS was associated with fewer blood transfusions, shorter incision length, and slighter postoperative pain, but more extra ports.
• In this study, all the other parameters were comparable.
• As per randomized evidence, SILS seemed associated with less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, but longer operative time.
• For only colectomy cases, more conversions to open surgery were evident with SILS.
• Findins suggested that SILS was associated with longer surgical time for Easterners, but not for Westerners.
• The detected differences were not relevant clinically.