These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A systematic review comparing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction.
    Author: Sajid MS, Khawaja AH, Sains P, Singh KK, Baig MK.
    Journal: Am J Surg; 2016 Jul; 212(1):138-50. PubMed ID: 27162071.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether surgical outcomes differ between laparoscopic vs open approach for adhesiolysis in patients presenting with adhesional small bowel obstruction (ASBO). DATA SOURCE: A systematic review of literature on published studies reporting the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO was undertaken using the principles of meta-analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen comparative studies on 38,057 patients, evaluating the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO were analyzed. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis resulted in the reduced risk of morbidity (P < .00001), mortality (P < .0001), and surgical infections (P = .003). In addition, the risk of respiratory complications, cardiac complications, bowel resection, and venous thromboembolism was lower with shorter hospitalization in laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. However, statistical equivalence was seen in variables of duration of operation and iatrogenic enterotomies. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for ASBO seems to have clinically proven advantage over open approach.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]