Meta-analysis of the Results of Randomized Controlled Trials that Compared Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Acute Appendicitis

@article{Ohtani2012MetaanalysisOT,
  title={Meta-analysis of the Results of Randomized Controlled Trials that Compared Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Acute Appendicitis},
  author={H. Ohtani and Y. Tamamori and Y. Arimoto and Y. Nishiguchi and K. Maeda and K. Hirakawa},
  journal={Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery},
  year={2012},
  volume={16},
  pages={1929-1939}
}
PurposeWe conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of patients with acute appendicitis.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for relevant papers published between January 1990 and February 2012. We analyzed 22 outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis.ResultsWe identified 39 papers reporting results from randomized controlled trials… Expand
Evidence of surgical outcomes fluctuates over time: results from a cumulative meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis
TLDR
The evidence regarding treatment effectiveness changed over time, after treatment effectiveness became significant in trials comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomy, and the effect size in favor of open procedures began to disappear after 2001. Expand
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
TLDR
Findings do not support the application of SILA because of its significantly longer operative times and the higher doses of analgesia required compared with those for 3-point LA. Expand
Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials on Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Acute Appendicitis: Has Firm Evidence been Reached?
In their interesting meta-analysis, Ohtani and colleagues have assessed the benefits and harms of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for acute appendicitis. One of the most patientcentredExpand
Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
TLDR
SILA is feasible and safe with no obvious advantages over CLA, Therefore, it may be considered as an alternative to CLA and should be considered in addition to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. Expand
Outcomes after open and laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy: A meta-analysis.
TLDR
Current literature remains inconclusive on the optimal approach of appendectomy in pregnant women, and further larger-volume studies are needed in order to elucidate the critical effect of laparoscopic appendectomy on fetal loss rates. Expand
Bayesian network meta-analysis of the effects of single-incision laparoscopic surgery, conventional laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis
TLDR
It is indicated that laparoscopic appendectomy, including SILS and CLA, may have more advantages for acute appendicitis compared with OA, and SILS procedures require improvement and simplification to reduce the surgical procedure duration. Expand
Single Incision versus Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
TLDR
The current best evidence shows SILA holds the promise of improving postoperative recovery and cosmetic result with equal efficacy and safety, whereas it is associated with higher surgical difficulty with longer surgical time when compared with CMLA. Expand
Single-incision versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
  • Jiang-ming Chen, W. Geng, +4 authors X. Geng
  • Medicine
  • Minimally invasive therapy & allied technologies : MITAT : official journal of the Society for Minimally Invasive Therapy
  • 2015
TLDR
In selected patients, SILA was confirmed to be as safe and effective as CTLA and has higher cosmetic satisfaction and shorter recovery time to normal activity. Expand
Meta-analysis of randomized trials on single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.
TLDR
Similar postoperative morbidity and wound infection rates for single-incision and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy are supported by the current literature, but single- incision surgery requires longer operative time. Expand
Comparison of Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy in Management of Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis
TLDR
SILA represents an expeditious and reliable technique for appendicitis especially in complicated cases and further assessment including multicenter prospective study is thought to be required to confirm this. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 54 REFERENCES
A prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.
TLDR
This prospective randomized study shows that laparoscopic appendectomy is superior to open appendectomy in terms of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and return to normal activities and is recommended as the approach of choice in the management of acute appendicitis. Expand
A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Appendectomy
TLDR
Patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy have a shorter duration of analgesic use and return to full activities sooner postoperatively when compared with patients who underwent open appendectomies, and are considered to be the procedure of choice in patients with acute appendicitis. Expand
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the obese patient: a subset analysis from a prospective, randomized, double-blind study
TLDR
In this study, laparoscopic appendectomy did not show a benefit over the open approach for obese patients with appendicitis and no significant differences were seen in any of the secondary outcomes except for a longer operative time among the obese patients. Expand
A prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy: Clinical and economic analyses.
TLDR
While Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with statistically significant but clinically questionable advantages over open appendectomy, a laparoscopic approach is relatively less expensive. Expand
Randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open appendicectomy
TLDR
Laparoscopic appendicectomy may allow reduction in the number of wound infections and earlier return to normal activities and earlierreturn tonormal activities in patients with acute appendicitis. Expand
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: What is the real difference? Results of a prospective randomized double-blinded trial
TLDR
In this prospective randomized double-blinded trial, laparoscopic appendectomy appears to confer no significant advantage over open appendectomy for postoperative pain or lost work days and it does carry an increase in operating room costs and, contrary to other reports, hospital stay is not shortened. Expand
A prospective, randomized, unicenter study comparing laparoscopic and open treatments of acute appendicitis
TLDR
There was less postoperative pain and shorter recovery time after laparoscopic surgery than after the open procedure, and postoperative morbidity is comparable with that for a conventional operation. Expand
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in men: a prospective randomized trial
TLDR
The postoperative length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between OA and LA for men, and laparoscopic appendectomy required more time and did not offer any advantages compared with OA. Expand
Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
TLDR
Unlike other minimally invasive procedures, laparoscopic appendectomy did not offer a significant advantage over open appendectomy in all studied parameters except quality of life scores at 2 weeks. Expand
Randomized, Single-blinded Trial of Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy in Children: Effects on Postoperative Analgesia
TLDR
Laroscopy did not improve analgesia and postoperative recovery after appendectomy in children and there was no difference between groups for demographic data, analgesia, sedation, delay before eating and walking, incidence of urinary retention, nausea, vomiting. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...