Laparoscopic versus open portoenterostomy for treatment of biliary atresia: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Abstract

Objective

Our goal was to compare laparoscopic portoenterostomy versus open portoenterostomy for the treatment of biliary atresia.

Materials and methods

Using the databases EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane, we carried out a thorough literature search up to 2022. Studies comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of biliary atresia were included.

Results

Twenty-three studies comparing laparoscopic portoenterostomy (LPE) (n = 689) and open portoenterostomy (OPE) (n = 818) were considered appropriate for meta-analysis. Age at surgery time was lower in the LPE group than OPE group (I2 = 84%), (WMD − 4.70, 95% CI − 9.14 to − 0.26; P = 0.04). Significantly decreased blood loss (I2 = 94%), (WMD − 17.85, 95% CI − 23.67 to − 12.02; P < 0.00001) and time to feed were found in the laparoscopic group (I2 = 97%), (WMD − 2.88, 95% CI − 4.71 to − 1.04; P = 0.002). Significantly decreased operative time was found in the open group (I2 = 85%), (WMD 32.52, 95% CI 15.65–49.39; P = 0.0002). Weight, transfusion rate, overall complication rate, cholangitis, time to drain removal, length of stay, jaundice clearance, and two-year transplant-free survival were not significantly different across the groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic portoenterostomy provides advantages regarding operative bleeding and the time to begin feeding. No differences in remain characteristics. Based on the data presented to us by this meta-analysis, LPE is not superior to OPE in terms of overall results.

Keywords

Hashtags

This article is published on an external journal. Click below to read the full text.