Dataset Information

Clinical effectiveness of gasless laparoscopic surgery for abdominal conditions: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In high-income countries, laparoscopic surgery is the preferred approach for many abdominal conditions. Conventional laparoscopy is a complex intervention that is challenging to adopt and implement in low resource settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the clinical effectiveness of gasless laparoscopy compared to conventional laparoscopy with CO₂ pneumoperitoneum and open surgery for general surgery and gynaecological procedures.

Methods

A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, AJOL databases and Cochrane Library was performed from inception to January 2021. All randomised (RCTs) and comparative cohort (non-RCTs) studies comparing gasless laparoscopy with open surgery or conventional laparoscopy were included. The primary outcomes were mortality, conversion rates and intraoperative complications.

Secondary outcomes

operative times and length of stay. The inverse variance random-effects model was used to synthesise data.

Results

63 studies were included: 41 RCTs and 22 non-RCTs (3,620 patients). No procedure-related deaths were reported in the studies. For gasless vs conventional laparoscopy there was no difference in intraoperative complications for general RR 1.04 [CI 0.45-2.40] or gynaecological surgery RR 0.66 [0.14-3.13]. In the gasless laparoscopy group, the conversion rates for gynaecological surgery were high RR 11.72 [CI 2.26-60.87] when compared to conventional laparoscopy. For gasless vs open surgery, the operative times were longer for gasless surgery in general surgery RCT group MD (mean difference) 10 [CI 0.64, 19.36], but significantly shorter in the gynaecology RCT group MD - 18.74 [CI - 29.23, - 8.26]. For gasless laparoscopy vs open surgery non-RCT, the length of stay was shorter for gasless laparoscopy in general surgery MD - 3.94 [CI - 5.93, - 1.95] and gynaecology MD - 1.75 [CI - 2.64, - 0.86]. Overall GRADE assessment for RCTs and Non-RCTs was very low.

Conclusion

Gasless laparoscopy has advantages for selective general and gynaecological procedures and may have a vital role to play in low resource settings.

SUBMITTER: Aruparayil N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8599349 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Evidence of benefits of laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted colectomies (LAC) over open procedures in gastrointestinal surgery has continued to accumulate. With its wide implementation, technical difficulties and limitations of LAC have become clear. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced in an attempt to facilitate the transition from open techniques to minimally invasive procedures. Continuing debate exists about which approach is to be preferred, HALS or LAC. Several studies have compared these two techniques in colorectal surgery, but no single study provided evidence which procedure is superior. Therefore, a systematic review was carried out comparing HALS with LAC colorectal resection. METHODS: Eligible studies were identified from electronic databases (Medline, Embase Cochrane) and cross-reference search. The database search, quality assessment, and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. Minimal outcome criteria for inclusion were operating time, conversion rate, hospital stay, and morbidity. RESULTS: Out of 468 studies a total of 13 studies were selected for comprehensive review. Two randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 11 non-RCTs, comprising 1017 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Because of possible clinical heterogeneity two groups of procedures were created: segmental colectomies and total (procto)colectomies. In the segmental colectomy group significant differences in favor of the HALS group were seen in operating time (WMD 19 min) and conversion rate (OR of 0.3 conversions). In the total (procto)colectomy group a significant difference in favor of the HALS group was seen in operating time (WMD 61 min). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review indicates that HALS provides a more efficient segmental colectomy regarding operating time and conversion rate, particularly accounting for diverticulitis. A significant operating time advantage exists for HALS total (procto)colectomy. HALS must therefore be considered a valuable addition to the laparoscopic armamentarium to avoid conversion and speed up complicated colectomies.

Project description:BackgroundTranexamic acid (TXA) is widely used across surgical specialties to reduce perioperative bleeding. It has been shown to be effective in spinal surgery and lower limb arthroplasty. Among all languages, there are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses investigating its clinical effectiveness for all types of shoulder surgery.PurposeTo investigate the clinical effectiveness of TXA in all types of shoulder surgery, including open and arthroscopic procedures. To investigate the effect of TXA on bleeding and non-bleeding-related outcomes.Study designSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsA protocol for the study was designed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020185482). The literature search included the MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases. All randomized controlled trials evaluating the use of TXA against placebo, in all types of shoulder surgery, were included. Assessments were undertaken for risk of bias and certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was total blood loss. Secondary outcomes included those not directly related to bleeding. Data from comparable outcomes were pooled and analyzed quantitatively or descriptively, as appropriate.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and data from 7 of these studies were pooled in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in 2 of 3 outcomes measuring perioperative bleeding with TXA compared with controls: estimated total blood loss (mean difference, -209.66 mL; 95% CI, -389.11 to -30.21; P = .02) and postoperative blood loss as measured by drain output (mean difference, -84.8 mL; 95% CI, -140.04 to -29.56; P = .003). Hemoglobin reduction was reduced but not statistically significant (mean difference, -0.33 g/dL; 95% CI -0.69 to 0.03; P = .07). This result became significant with sensitivity analysis excluding arthroscopic procedures.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that TXA was effective in reducing blood loss in shoulder surgery. Larger randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias for specific surgical shoulder procedures are required.Clinical relevanceTXA can be used across shoulder surgery to reduced perioperative blood loss. The use of TXA may have other beneficial features, including reduced postoperative pain and reduced operative time.