Hiromu Miyake1,2, Shogo Seo1, Agostino Pierro3. 1. Division of General and Thoracic Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, 1526-555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada. 2. Department of Pediatric Surgery, Shizuoka Children's Hospital, 860 Urushiyama, Aoi-ku, Shizuoka, 4208660, Japan. 3. Division of General and Thoracic Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, 1526-555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada. agostino.pierro@sickkids.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is one of the most important cause of postoperative morbidity in children who underwent abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic management for ASBO in pediatric patients has been reported. However, its safety and efficacy has not been evaluated in details. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of ASBO in children. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of intervention and the preferred reporting item for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) and a protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017067914). The primary outcome was the number of intraoperative and postoperative complications. The secondary outcome was length of hospital stay. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Quality of evidence was summarized using the grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We identified three observational studies and no randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis was done only for the primary outcome. Complications were significantly fewer after laparoscopy compared to laparotomy (Odds ratio = 0.51; 95% CI 0.40-0.66; p < 0.01; I 2: 0%). The overall risk of bias was considered serious. CONCLUSIONS: Our results, based on observational studies, indicate that laparoscopy for ASBO was associated with less postoperative complications compared to conventional laparotomy. However, the quality of evidence is very low. A well-controlled study is needed to assess the efficacy of laparoscopy for pediatric patients with ASBO.
PURPOSE: Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is one of the most important cause of postoperative morbidity in children who underwent abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic management for ASBO in pediatric patients has been reported. However, its safety and efficacy has not been evaluated in details. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of ASBO in children. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of intervention and the preferred reporting item for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) and a protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017067914). The primary outcome was the number of intraoperative and postoperative complications. The secondary outcome was length of hospital stay. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Quality of evidence was summarized using the grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We identified three observational studies and no randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis was done only for the primary outcome. Complications were significantly fewer after laparoscopy compared to laparotomy (Odds ratio = 0.51; 95% CI 0.40-0.66; p < 0.01; I 2: 0%). The overall risk of bias was considered serious. CONCLUSIONS: Our results, based on observational studies, indicate that laparoscopy for ASBO was associated with less postoperative complications compared to conventional laparotomy. However, the quality of evidence is very low. A well-controlled study is needed to assess the efficacy of laparoscopy for pediatric patients with ASBO.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laparoscopy; Pediatrics; Postoperative adhesion; Small bowel obstruction
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Peter Tugwell; Andre Knottnerus Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-12-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn Vist; Regina Kunz; Jan Brozek; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Victor Montori; Elie A Akl; Ben Djulbegovic; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Susan L Norris; John W Williams; David Atkins; Joerg Meerpohl; Holger J Schünemann Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Victor Montori; Gunn Vist; Regina Kunz; Jan Brozek; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Ben Djulbegovic; David Atkins; Yngve Falck-Ytter; John W Williams; Joerg Meerpohl; Susan L Norris; Elie A Akl; Holger J Schünemann Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2011-07-30 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Hanna Alemayehu; Bryan David; Amita A Desai; Corey W Iqbal; Shawn D St Peter Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2014-11-25 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Pablo Aguayo; Jason D Fraser; Sadia Ilyas; Shawn D St Peter; George W Holcomb; Daniel J Ostlie Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2011-01-08 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Hugh W Grant; Michael C Parker; Malcolm S Wilson; Donald Menzies; Graham Sunderland; Jeremy N Thompson; David N Clark; Alastair D Knight; Alison M Crowe; Harold Ellis Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Jonathan Ac Sterne; Miguel A Hernán; Barnaby C Reeves; Jelena Savović; Nancy D Berkman; Meera Viswanathan; David Henry; Douglas G Altman; Mohammed T Ansari; Isabelle Boutron; James R Carpenter; An-Wen Chan; Rachel Churchill; Jonathan J Deeks; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Jamie Kirkham; Peter Jüni; Yoon K Loke; Theresa D Pigott; Craig R Ramsay; Deborah Regidor; Hannah R Rothstein; Lakhbir Sandhu; Pasqualina L Santaguida; Holger J Schünemann; Beverly Shea; Ian Shrier; Peter Tugwell; Lucy Turner; Jeffrey C Valentine; Hugh Waddington; Elizabeth Waters; George A Wells; Penny F Whiting; Julian Pt Higgins Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-10-12