Aruparayil, N orcid.org/0000-0002-2898-772X, Bolton, W, Mishra, A et al. (7 more authors) (2021) Clinical effectiveness of gasless laparoscopic surgery for abdominal conditions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgical Endoscopy, 35 (12). pp. 6427-6437. ISSN 0930-2794
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.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © The Author(s) 2021. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
Keywords: | Gasless laparoscopy; Abdominal wall lift; LMIC; Low resource setting; Rural surgery; Clinical efectiveness; Open surgery; General surgery; Gynaecological surgery |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Leeds Institute of Health Sciences (Leeds) > Academic Unit of Health Economics (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Leeds Institute of Health Sciences (Leeds) > Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development (Leeds) |
Funding Information: | Funder Grant number NIHR National Inst Health Research 16/137/44 |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 18 Aug 2021 13:40 |
Last Modified: | 25 Jun 2023 22:44 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Springer |
Identification Number: | 10.1007/s00464-021-08677-7 |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:177170 |