Literature DB >> 9171743

Analysis of randomized controlled trials in laparoscopic surgery.

K Slim1, J Bousquet, F Kwiatkowski, D Pezet, J Chipponi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled studies of surgical procedures are difficult, but can be done to acceptable standards. There are few published objective assessments of such trials.
METHODS: The original articles that involved a randomized controlled trial including at least one laparoscopic procedure were reviewed and evaluated with special interest in their methodology. An assessment form containing 11 generic questions and three additional criteria (assessment of quality of life, cost analysis and laparoscopic experience required) was used. Forty trials were retrieved including 12 on cholecystectomy, 12 on hernia repair and 12 on appendicectomy. Each trial was scored by two assessors.
RESULTS: The agreement among the two independent assessors was very good. Six of the trials were well conducted but 22 had a poor score. The trials on cholecystectomy were scored the best in contrast to those on hernia repair or appendicectomy. Few trials provided an adequate prospective calculation of the sample size, an unbiased assessment of endpoints, evaluation of the quality of life and a study of the economic aspects.
CONCLUSION: Readers should be cautious when interpreting the results of some of these trials and their impact on daily surgical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9171743

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  9 in total

1.  Limits of evidence-based surgery.

Authors:  Karem Slim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Why perform a priori sample size calculation?

Authors:  Forough Farrokhyar; Deven Reddy; Rudolf W Poolman; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 3.  Convalescence after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a qualitative systematic review.

Authors:  Mette Astrup Tolver; Jacob Rosenberg; Thue Bisgaard
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2006-2008.

Authors:  Hossein Masoomi; Steven Mills; Matthew O Dolich; Noor Ketana; Joseph C Carmichael; Ninh T Nguyen; Michael J Stamos
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Common bile duct stones - their presentation, diagnosis and management.

Authors:  Rajendra Desai; Bahaman N Shokouhi
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 0.656

6.  Randomised clinical trials in surgery: a look at the ethical and practical issues.

Authors:  Anjan Kumar Das
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 0.656

7.  Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing standard analgesia with combined intra-operative cystic plate and port-site local anesthesia for post-operative pain management in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Mladjan Protic; Radovan Veljkovic; Anton J Bilchik; Ana Popovic; Milana Kresoja; Aviram Nissan; Itzhak Avital; Alexander Stojadinovic
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Patients' quality of life after laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Li Chen; Si-feng Tao; Yuan Xu; Fu Fang; Shu-you Peng
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.066

9.  Use of controlled randomized trials to evaluate new technologies and new operative procedures in surgery.

Authors:  S Law; J Wong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.267

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.