Download PDF
Eur J Pediatr Surg 2013; 23(06): 474-479
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1333639
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Systematic Review of Level 1 Evidence for Laparoscopic Pediatric Surgery: Do Our Procedures Comply with the Requirements of Evidence-Based Medicine?

Jens Dingemann
1   Centre of Pediatric Surgery, Hannover Medical School and Bult Children's Hospital, Hannover, Germany
,
Benno M. Ure
1   Centre of Pediatric Surgery, Hannover Medical School and Bult Children's Hospital, Hannover, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

24 October 2012

08 December 2012

Publication Date:
26 February 2013 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Laparoscopic techniques have evolved quickly in recent years and are regarded as standard procedures in pediatric surgery today. However, most studies comparing laparoscopic operations with the corresponding open procedure do not reach a high level of evidence according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For evidence Level 1a, a meta-analysis (MA) of different randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is required. For evidence Level 1b, at least one RCT is required. The aim of our study was to evaluate the availability of Level 1 studies comparing laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation in pediatric surgery.

Materials and Methods Systematic review of clinical Level 1 studies using PubMed. All MA and RCT were identified and individually reviewed. Only studies comparing pediatric laparoscopic procedures with the corresponding open operation were included. RCTs included in MA were only individually analyzed if they focused on additional endpoints. Endpoints of the study were advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy compared with the open operation.

Results A total of 20 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria (9 MA and 11 RCT). Studies providing evidence Level 1a were identified for five types of laparoscopic procedures (laparoscopic appendectomy, inguinal hernia repair, orchidopexy, pyloromyotomy, and varicocelectomy). Studies providing evidence Level 1b were identified for two types of laparoscopic procedures (fundoplication and pyeloplasty). The advantages of laparoscopy were less wound infections, ileus and postoperative pain (appendectomy), less retching (fundoplication), lower incidence of metachronous inguinal hernia, shorter hospital stay (appendectomy, orchiopexy, and pyeloplasty), and shorter time to full feeds (pyloromyotomy).

Conclusion Studies providing evidence Level 1 are only available for seven laparoscopic procedures in pediatric surgery. Effort has to be made to extend the existing Level 1 evidence and to gain high level evidence for further laparoscopic procedures.

Keywords

laparoscopic surgery - evidence-based medicine - children - meta-analysis - randomized controlled trial
 

  • References

  • 1 Dingemann J, Kuebler JF, Ure BM. Laparoscopic and computer-assisted surgery in children. Scand J Surg 2011; 100 (4) 236-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kuebler JF, Ure BM. Minimally invasive surgery in the neonate. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2011; 16 (3) 151-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ure BM, Bax NM, van der Zee DC. Laparoscopy in infants and children: a prospective study on feasibility and the impact on routine surgery. J Pediatr Surg 2000; 35 (8) 1170-1173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 te Velde EA, Bax NM, Tytgat SH , et al. Minimally invasive pediatric surgery: Increasing implementation in daily practice and resident's training. Surg Endosc 2008; 22 (1) 163-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. Levels of Evidence (March 2009)”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Available at: http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1025
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rangel SJ, Henry MC, Brindle M, Moss RL. Small evidence for small incisions: pediatric laparoscopy and the need for more rigorous evaluation of novel surgical therapies. J Pediatr Surg 2003; 38 (10) 1429-1433
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ostlie DJ, St Peter SD. The current state of evidence-based pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 2010; 45 (10) 1940-1946
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ure BM. Enthusiasm, evidence and ethics: the Triple E of minimally invasive pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 2013; 48 (1) 27-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Aziz O, Athanasiou T, Tekkis PP , et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2006; 243 (1) 17-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Saha N, Saha DK, Rahman MA, Islam MK, Aziz MA. Comparison of post operative morbidity between laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children. Mymensingh Med J 2010; 19 (3) 348-352
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lintula H, Kokki H, Vanamo K, Valtonen H, Mattila M, Eskelinen M. The costs and effects of laparoscopic appendectomy in children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004; 158 (1) 34-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Little DC, Custer MD, May BH, Blalock SE, Cooney DR. Laparoscopic appendectomy: an unnecessary and expensive procedure in children?. J Pediatr Surg 2002; 37 (3) 310-317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lintula H, Kokki H, Vanamo K. Single-blind randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in children. Br J Surg 2001; 88 (4) 510-514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 McHoney M, Wade AM, Eaton S , et al. Clinical outcome of a randomized controlled blinded trial of open versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication in infants and children. Ann Surg 2011; 254 (2) 209-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Koivusalo AI, Korpela R, Wirtavuori K, Piiparinen S, Rintala RJ, Pakarinen MP. A single-blinded, randomized comparison of laparoscopic versus open hernia repair in children. Pediatrics 2009; 123 (1) 332-337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Chan KL, Hui WC, Tam PK. Prospective randomized single-center, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic vs open repair of pediatric inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc 2005; 19 (7) 927-932
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Saranga Bharathi R, Arora M, Baskaran V. Pediatric inguinal hernia: laparoscopic versus open surgery. JSLS 2008; 12 (3) 277-281
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yang C, Zhang H, Pu J, Mei H, Zheng L, Tong Q. Laparoscopic vs open herniorrhaphy in the management of pediatric inguinal hernia: a systemic review and meta-analysis. J Pediatr Surg 2011; 46 (9) 1824-1834
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Alzahem A. Laparoscopic versus open inguinal herniotomy in infants and children: a meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int 2011; 27 (6) 605-612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Guo J, Liang Z, Zhang H , et al. Laparoscopic versus open orchiopexy for non-palpable undescended testes in children: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int 2011; 27 (9) 943-952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Abolyosr A. Laparoscopic versus open orchiopexy in the management of abdominal testis: a descriptive study. Int J Urol 2006; 13 (11) 1421-1424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ferro F, Spagnoli A, Zaccara A, De Vico A, La Sala E. Is preoperative laparoscopy useful for impalpable testis?. J Urol 1999; 162 (3 Pt 2) 995-996 , discussion 997
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Mei H, Pu J, Yang C, Zhang H, Zheng L, Tong Q. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 2011; 25 (5) 727-736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hall NJ, Van Der Zee J, Tan HL, Pierro A. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy. Ann Surg 2004; 240 (5) 774-778
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Jia WQ, Tian JH, Yang KH , et al. Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2011; 21 (2) 77-81
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Oomen MW, Hoekstra LT, Bakx R, Ubbink DT, Heij HA. Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on major complications. Surg Endosc 2012; 26 (8) 2104-2110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Siddiqui S, Heidel RE, Angel CA, Kennedy Jr AP. Pyloromyotomy: randomized control trial of laparoscopic vs open technique. J Pediatr Surg 2012; 47 (1) 93-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Borruto FA, Impellizzeri P, Antonuccio P , et al. Laparoscopic vs open varicocelectomy in children and adolescents: review of the recent literature and meta-analysis. J Pediatr Surg 2010; 45 (12) 2464-2469
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312 (7023) 71-72
    Google Scholar
  • 30 St Peter SD, Ostlie DJ. The necessity for prospective evidence for single-site umbilical laparoscopic surgery. Semin Pediatr Surg 2011; 20 (4) 232-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Iqbal CW, Ostlie DJ. The minimally invasive approach to appendectomy: is less better?. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2012; 22 (3) 201-206
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 St Peter SD, Adibe OO, Juang D , et al. Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 2011; 254 (4) 586-590
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar