Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Surg. 2016 Jul;212(1):138-50. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.01.030. Epub 2016 Apr 13.

A systematic review comparing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction.

Author information

1
Department of General, Endoscopic & Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, West Sussex BN11 2DH, UK. Electronic address: surgeon1wrh@hotmail.com.
2
Department of General, Endoscopic & Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, West Sussex BN11 2DH, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate whether surgical outcomes differ between laparoscopic vs open approach for adhesiolysis in patients presenting with adhesional small bowel obstruction (ASBO).

DATA SOURCE:

A systematic review of literature on published studies reporting the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO was undertaken using the principles of meta-analysis.

RESULTS:

Fourteen comparative studies on 38,057 patients, evaluating the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO were analyzed. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis resulted in the reduced risk of morbidity (P < .00001), mortality (P < .0001), and surgical infections (P = .003). In addition, the risk of respiratory complications, cardiac complications, bowel resection, and venous thromboembolism was lower with shorter hospitalization in laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. However, statistical equivalence was seen in variables of duration of operation and iatrogenic enterotomies.

CONCLUSIONS:

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for ASBO seems to have clinically proven advantage over open approach.

KEYWORDS:

Adhesiolysis; Adhesions; Enterotomy; Laparoscopy; Laparotomy

PMID:
27162071
DOI:
10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.01.030
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center