Cargando…
Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Recently, laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) have been widely performed instead of open appendectomies (OAs) during pregnancy. However, concerns about the safety of LA during pregnancy remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence relating to the...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6482586/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31023289 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0505-9 |
_version_ | 1783413913830817792 |
---|---|
author | Lee, Seung Hwan Lee, Jin Young Choi, Yoon Young Lee, Jae Gil |
author_facet | Lee, Seung Hwan Lee, Jin Young Choi, Yoon Young Lee, Jae Gil |
author_sort | Lee, Seung Hwan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recently, laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) have been widely performed instead of open appendectomies (OAs) during pregnancy. However, concerns about the safety of LA during pregnancy remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence relating to the safety of LA versus OA for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy. METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify articles describing LA versus OA in pregnancy, without restrictions regarding the publication date. The primary endpoints were fetal loss and preterm delivery. RESULTS: After screening 801 studies, 22 comparative cohort studies were included in the analysis, which involved 4694 women, of whom 905 underwent LAs and 3789 underwent OAs. Fetal loss was significantly higher among those who underwent LAs compared with those who underwent OAs, and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 1.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22–2.42) without heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis showed that the effect size was influenced by one of the studies, because its removal resulted in there being no significant difference between LA and OA with respect to the risk of fetal loss (OR 1.163, 95% CI: 0.68–1.99; P = 0.581). A significant difference was not evident between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.51–1.15), a result that did not change following the sensitivity analysis. The patients who underwent LA had shorter hospital stays (mean difference − 1.01, 95% CI: -1.61–-0.41) and a lower wound infection risk (OR 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21–0.76) compared with those who underwent OA. CONCLUSION: It is not reasonable to conclude that LA in pregnant women might be associated with a greater risk of fetal loss. The difference between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery was not significant. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6482586 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64825862019-05-02 Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis Lee, Seung Hwan Lee, Jin Young Choi, Yoon Young Lee, Jae Gil BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: Recently, laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) have been widely performed instead of open appendectomies (OAs) during pregnancy. However, concerns about the safety of LA during pregnancy remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence relating to the safety of LA versus OA for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy. METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify articles describing LA versus OA in pregnancy, without restrictions regarding the publication date. The primary endpoints were fetal loss and preterm delivery. RESULTS: After screening 801 studies, 22 comparative cohort studies were included in the analysis, which involved 4694 women, of whom 905 underwent LAs and 3789 underwent OAs. Fetal loss was significantly higher among those who underwent LAs compared with those who underwent OAs, and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 1.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22–2.42) without heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis showed that the effect size was influenced by one of the studies, because its removal resulted in there being no significant difference between LA and OA with respect to the risk of fetal loss (OR 1.163, 95% CI: 0.68–1.99; P = 0.581). A significant difference was not evident between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.51–1.15), a result that did not change following the sensitivity analysis. The patients who underwent LA had shorter hospital stays (mean difference − 1.01, 95% CI: -1.61–-0.41) and a lower wound infection risk (OR 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21–0.76) compared with those who underwent OA. CONCLUSION: It is not reasonable to conclude that LA in pregnant women might be associated with a greater risk of fetal loss. The difference between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery was not significant. BioMed Central 2019-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6482586/ /pubmed/31023289 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0505-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Lee, Seung Hwan Lee, Jin Young Choi, Yoon Young Lee, Jae Gil Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title | Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title_full | Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title_short | Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
title_sort | laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6482586/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31023289 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0505-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leeseunghwan laparoscopicappendectomyversusopenappendectomyforsuspectedappendicitisduringpregnancyasystematicreviewandupdatedmetaanalysis AT leejinyoung laparoscopicappendectomyversusopenappendectomyforsuspectedappendicitisduringpregnancyasystematicreviewandupdatedmetaanalysis AT choiyoonyoung laparoscopicappendectomyversusopenappendectomyforsuspectedappendicitisduringpregnancyasystematicreviewandupdatedmetaanalysis AT leejaegil laparoscopicappendectomyversusopenappendectomyforsuspectedappendicitisduringpregnancyasystematicreviewandupdatedmetaanalysis |