↓ Skip to main content

Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial)

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial)
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00464-016-5298-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Passera, Alberto Bullano, Yoav Mintz, Asaf Kedar, Luigi Boni, Elisa Cassinotti, Riccardo Rosati, Uberto Fumagalli Romario, Mario Sorrentino, Marco Brizzolari, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Achille Lucio Gaspari, Dario Andreone, Elena De Stefani, Giuseppe Navarra, Salvatore Lazzara, Maurizio Degiuli, Kirill Shishin, Igor Khatkov, Ivan Kazakov, Rudolf Schrittwieser, Thomas Carus, Alessio Corradi, Guenther Sitzman, Antonio Lacy, Selman Uranues, Amir Szold, Mario Morino

Abstract

Single-port laparoscopic surgery as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign disease has not yet been accepted as a standard procedure. The aim of the multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy trial was to compare morbidity rates after single-access (SPC) and standard laparoscopy (MPC). This non-inferiority phase 3 trial was conducted at 20 hospital surgical departments in six countries. At each centre, patients were randomly assigned to undergo either SPC or MPC. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01104727). The study was conducted between April 2011 and May 2015. A total of 600 patients were randomly assigned to receive either SPC (n = 297) or MPC (n = 303) and were eligible for data analysis. Postsurgical complications within 60 days were recorded in 13 patients (4.7 %) in the SPC group and in 16 (6.1 %) in the MPC group (P = 0.468); however, single-access procedures took longer [70 min (range 25-265) vs. 55 min (range 22-185); P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay or pain VAS scores between the two groups. An incisional hernia developed within 1 year in six patients in the SPC group and in three in the MPC group (P = 0.331). Patients were more satisfied with aesthetic results after SPC, whereas surgeons rated the aesthetic results higher after MPC. No difference in quality of life scores, as measured by the gastrointestinal quality of life index at 60 days after surgery, was observed between the two groups. In selected patients undergoing cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease, SPC is non-inferior to MPC in terms of safety but it entails a longer operative time. Possible concerns about a higher risk of incisional hernia following SPC do not appear to be justified. Patient satisfaction with aesthetic results was greater after SPC than after MPC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 39%
Psychology 6 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 32 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,200,775
of 25,824,818 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#539
of 6,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,895
of 322,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#21
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,824,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,975 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.