Surgical endoscopy
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
For the scientific evaluation of the endoscopic and open mesh techniques for the repair of inguinal hernia, meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCT) are necessary. The Lichtenstein repair is one of the most common open mesh techniques and therefore of special interest. ⋯ Endoscopic repairs do have advantages interms of local complications and pain-associated parameters. For more detailed evaluation further well-structured trials with improved standardization of hernia type, operative technique, and surgeons' experience are necessary.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: a meta-analysis.
Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer has been gaining popularity in recent years, but few data exist to support the superiority of the laparoscopic approach over open repair. The objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy of open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer in an evidence-based approach using meta-analytical techniques. ⋯ Evidence suggests that laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer confers superior short-term benefits in terms of postoperative pain and wound morbidity. This approach is as safe and effective as open repair. Laparoscopic Graham-Steele patch repair of perforated duodenal or justapyloric ulcer is beneficial for patients without Boey's risk factors.