Jens Dingemann1, Benno M Ure1. 1. Centre of Pediatric Surgery, Hannover Medical School and Bult Children's Hospital, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic techniques have evolved quickly in recent years and are regarded as standard procedures in pediatric surgery today. However, most studies comparing laparoscopic operations with the corresponding open procedure do not reach a high level of evidence according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For evidence Level 1a, a meta-analysis (MA) of different randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is required. For evidence Level 1b, at least one RCT is required. The aim of our study was to evaluate the availability of Level 1 studies comparing laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation in pediatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review of clinical Level 1 studies using PubMed. All MA and RCT were identified and individually reviewed. Only studies comparing pediatric laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation were included. RCTs included in MA were only individually analyzed if they focused on additional endpoints. Endpoints of the study were advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy compared with the open operation. RESULTS: A total of 20 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria (9 MA and 11 RCT). Studies providing evidence Level 1a were identified for five types of laparoscopic procedures (laparoscopic appendectomy, inguinal hernia repair, orchidopexy, pyloromyotomy, and varicocelectomy). Studies providing evidence Level 1b were identified for two types of laparoscopic procedures (fundoplication and pyeloplasty). The advantages of laparoscopy were less wound infections, ileus and postoperative pain (appendectomy), less retching (fundoplication), lower incidence of metachronous inguinal hernia, shorter hospital stay (appendectomy, orchiopexy, and pyeloplasty), and shorter time to full feeds (pyloromyotomy). CONCLUSION: Studies providing evidence Level 1 are only available for seven laparoscopic procedures in pediatric surgery. Effort has to be made to extend the existing Level 1 evidence and to gain high level evidence for further laparoscopic procedures. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic techniques have evolved quickly in recent years and are regarded as standard procedures in pediatric surgery today. However, most studies comparing laparoscopic operations with the corresponding open procedure do not reach a high level of evidence according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For evidence Level 1a, a meta-analysis (MA) of different randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is required. For evidence Level 1b, at least one RCT is required. The aim of our study was to evaluate the availability of Level 1 studies comparing laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation in pediatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review of clinical Level 1 studies using PubMed. All MA and RCT were identified and individually reviewed. Only studies comparing pediatric laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation were included. RCTs included in MA were only individually analyzed if they focused on additional endpoints. Endpoints of the study were advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy compared with the open operation. RESULTS: A total of 20 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria (9 MA and 11 RCT). Studies providing evidence Level 1a were identified for five types of laparoscopic procedures (laparoscopic appendectomy, inguinal hernia repair, orchidopexy, pyloromyotomy, and varicocelectomy). Studies providing evidence Level 1b were identified for two types of laparoscopic procedures (fundoplication and pyeloplasty). The advantages of laparoscopy were less wound infections, ileus and postoperative pain (appendectomy), less retching (fundoplication), lower incidence of metachronous inguinal hernia, shorter hospital stay (appendectomy, orchiopexy, and pyeloplasty), and shorter time to full feeds (pyloromyotomy). CONCLUSION: Studies providing evidence Level 1 are only available for seven laparoscopic procedures in pediatric surgery. Effort has to be made to extend the existing Level 1 evidence and to gain high level evidence for further laparoscopic procedures. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Authors: Elke Zani-Ruttenstock; Augusto Zani; Emma Bullman; Eveline Lapidus-Krol; Agostino Pierro Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Sara Hernandez-Martin; Lidia Ayuso; Ada Yessenia Molina; Javier Pison; Miguel Angel Martinez-Bermejo; Alberto Perez-Martinez Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Xiaoyan Feng; Anna Morandi; Martin Boehne; Tawan Imvised; Benno M Ure; M Ure Benno; Joachim F Kuebler; Martin Lacher Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 4.584