Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic reduction (LR) versus open reduction (OR) in the management of intussusception in infants and children.</p> Methods <p>A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was conducted to identify studies comparing LR and OR for intussusception treatment in infants and children. A total of 15 studies with 1403 patients (595 in the LR group and 808 in the OR group) were included. Primary outcomes, including surgical time, time to oral feeding, hospital stay, bowel resection rates, recurrence rates, and overall complications, were analyzed using meta-analysis techniques.</p> Results <p>The analysis found no significant difference in surgical time between LR and OR (WMD = 1.19, 95% CI −15.79 to 18.17, <i>P</i> = 0.89), but LR was associated with significantly reduced time to oral feeding (WMD = −1.94, 95% CI −3.22 to −0.66, <i>P</i> = 0.003) and shorter hospital stays (WMD = −1.5, 95% CI −2.33 to −0.67, <i>P</i> = 0.0004). The rates of bowel resection and recurrence were similar between the two groups. LR was also associated with a lower overall rate of postoperative complications, though the difference did not reach statistical significance.</p> Conclusions <p>Laparoscopic reduction appears to be at least non-inferior to open surgery, with potential benefits such as earlier oral feeding and shorter hospital stay. However, given the clinical and methodological heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, and further high-quality randomized trials are warranted.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Open versus laparoscopic reduction in the treatment of pediatric intussusception: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月16日

查看全文
  • Xianming Yao,
  • Yan Lang,
  • Qian Chen,
  • Wenyuan Liu,
  • Senxia Zha

摘要

Purpose

This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic reduction (LR) versus open reduction (OR) in the management of intussusception in infants and children.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was conducted to identify studies comparing LR and OR for intussusception treatment in infants and children. A total of 15 studies with 1403 patients (595 in the LR group and 808 in the OR group) were included. Primary outcomes, including surgical time, time to oral feeding, hospital stay, bowel resection rates, recurrence rates, and overall complications, were analyzed using meta-analysis techniques.

Results

The analysis found no significant difference in surgical time between LR and OR (WMD = 1.19, 95% CI −15.79 to 18.17, P = 0.89), but LR was associated with significantly reduced time to oral feeding (WMD = −1.94, 95% CI −3.22 to −0.66, P = 0.003) and shorter hospital stays (WMD = −1.5, 95% CI −2.33 to −0.67, P = 0.0004). The rates of bowel resection and recurrence were similar between the two groups. LR was also associated with a lower overall rate of postoperative complications, though the difference did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic reduction appears to be at least non-inferior to open surgery, with potential benefits such as earlier oral feeding and shorter hospital stay. However, given the clinical and methodological heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, and further high-quality randomized trials are warranted.