Scholarlink

Background <p>Hirschsprung disease (HD) is definitively treated by resecting the aganglionic bowel segment and performing a pull-through procedure, with the Swenson and Soave techniques being two of the most widely adopted. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare their global efficacy and safety profiles.</p> Methods <p>We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for retrospective clinical studies comparing the Soave and Swenson surgeries. Data regarding intraoperative parameters, short-term complications, and long-term functional outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model.</p> Results <p>Eight studies encompassing 506 pediatric patients were included. The Swenson procedure was associated with significantly shorter operative times (MD = 26.73&#xa0;min, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.00001) and lower intraoperative blood loss (MD = 13.69&#xa0;ml, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.00001) compared to the Soave procedure. Conversely, the Soave group demonstrated a higher mean defecation frequency on the final day of hospital stay (MD = 1.20, <i>P</i> = 0.004). Notably, there were no statistically significant differences between the procedures regarding hospital stay duration, short-term adverse events (e.g., anastomotic stricture, leaks, obstruction), or long-term complications (e.g., colon prolapse, incontinence, enterocolitis).</p> Conclusion <p>We detected no statistically significant differences between the Swenson and Soave procedures regarding short- and long-term adverse events, though certainty is limited by sparse data. The Swenson approach appears to offer better intraoperative efficiency; however, these findings must be interpreted with caution, given the retrospective nature and clinical heterogeneity of the included studies. Future randomized controlled trials incorporating standardized functional outcome metrics are recommended to guide clinical decision-making further.</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

Efficacy of Swenson versus Soave operations in treatment of Hirschsprung disease; a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月6日

查看全文
  • Sherif Medhat,
  • Ahmed Aouf,
  • Mohamed Mohamed,
  • Khalid Ismail,
  • Taha Esmail,
  • Mohamed Arafa

摘要

Background

Hirschsprung disease (HD) is definitively treated by resecting the aganglionic bowel segment and performing a pull-through procedure, with the Swenson and Soave techniques being two of the most widely adopted. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare their global efficacy and safety profiles.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for retrospective clinical studies comparing the Soave and Swenson surgeries. Data regarding intraoperative parameters, short-term complications, and long-term functional outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model.

Results

Eight studies encompassing 506 pediatric patients were included. The Swenson procedure was associated with significantly shorter operative times (MD = 26.73 min, P < 0.00001) and lower intraoperative blood loss (MD = 13.69 ml, P < 0.00001) compared to the Soave procedure. Conversely, the Soave group demonstrated a higher mean defecation frequency on the final day of hospital stay (MD = 1.20, P = 0.004). Notably, there were no statistically significant differences between the procedures regarding hospital stay duration, short-term adverse events (e.g., anastomotic stricture, leaks, obstruction), or long-term complications (e.g., colon prolapse, incontinence, enterocolitis).

Conclusion

We detected no statistically significant differences between the Swenson and Soave procedures regarding short- and long-term adverse events, though certainty is limited by sparse data. The Swenson approach appears to offer better intraoperative efficiency; however, these findings must be interpreted with caution, given the retrospective nature and clinical heterogeneity of the included studies. Future randomized controlled trials incorporating standardized functional outcome metrics are recommended to guide clinical decision-making further.