Author
Listed:
- Rui Sun
- Na Zhao
- Ke Zhao
- Zhe Su
- Yifan Zhang
- Mei Diao
- Long Li
Abstract
Objective: The outcomes of children with Choledochal cyst who undergo laparoscopic cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy versus open cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy have not been adequately compared. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to gain further insight into the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic excision in children with choledochal cysts. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from January 1973 to January 31, 2020 was performed utilizing the PRISMA guidelines. Short-term, long-term and total postoperative complications were the primary endpoint measurements, whereas intraoperative outcomes and other postoperative outcomes were the secondary endpoints. Results: The final analysis included 14 retrospective cohorts comprising 1767 patients. There were no significant differences in the patients’ short-term postoperative complications (RR = -1.08; 95% CI = -1.72 to -0.67) between the 2 approaches. However, improvements in long-term (RR = 0.09; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.18) and total postoperative complications (RR = -0.29; 95% CI = -0.40 to -0.21), estimated intraoperative blood loss and transfusion, time of initial feeding, and length of hospital stay were observed in patients who underwent laparoscopic excision when compared to those who underwent open surgery. Conclusions: Laparoscopic cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy provides similar or even improved intraoperative, postoperative outcomes when compared to open excision for children with Choledochal cyst.
Suggested Citation
Rui Sun & Na Zhao & Ke Zhao & Zhe Su & Yifan Zhang & Mei Diao & Long Li, 2020.
"Comparison of efficacy and safety of laparoscopic excision and open operation in children with choledochal cysts: A systematic review and update meta-analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, September.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0239857
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239857
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239857. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.