Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 10/2013

01-10-2013 | Letter to the Editor--Reply

Reply to: doi:10.1007/s00464-013-2958-8: Re: Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) (NCT00835250)

Do we know the correct sample size?

Author: José Noguera

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 10/2013

Login to get access

Excerpt

I have read with interest the comments by Dr. Carlson [1] about our study [2] and I want to thank him for his interest in improving the quality of surgical investigations and Surgical Endoscopy. …
Literature
1.
Carlson MA (2013) Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) (NCT00835250). Surg Endosc 27. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-013-2958-8
2.
Noguera JF, Cuadrado A, Dolz C, Olea JM, Garcia JC (2012) Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) (NCT00835250). Surg Endosc 26:3435–3441PubMedCrossRef
3.
Neugebauer EA, Becker M, Buess GF, Cuschieri A, Dauben HP, Fingerhut A, Fuchs KH, Habermalz B, Lantsberg L, Morino M, Reiter-Theil S, Soskuty G, Wayand W, Welsch T, European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) (2010) EAES recommendations on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 24:1594–1615PubMedCrossRef
4.
Friede T, Kieser M (2011) Sample size reassessment in non-inferiority trials. Internal pilot study designs with ANCOVA. Methods Inf Med 50:237–243PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Reply to: doi:10.1007/s00464-013-2958-8: Re: Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) (NCT00835250)
Do we know the correct sample size?
Author
José Noguera
Publication date
01-10-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 10/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-2963-y

Other articles of this Issue 10/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 10/2013 Go to the issue

Review

Towards automated visual flexible endoscope navigation

OriginalPaper

TEP under general anesthesia is superior to Lichtenstein under local anesthesia in terms of pain 6 weeks after surgery: results from a randomized clinical trial

Review

Chylothorax after esophagectomy for cancer: impact of the surgical approach and neoadjuvant treatment: systematic review and institutional analysis

Letter to the Editor

No differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer: a case–control study of 263 patients

OriginalPaper

Endoscopic endoluminal vacuum therapy is superior to other regimens in managing anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy: a comparative retrospective study

OriginalPaper

A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial of 5-mm versus 3-mm ports for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is smaller better?