Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Splenectomy for Treatment of Splenomegaly: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence regarding the outcomes of laparoscopic techniques in cases of splenomegaly.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic approaches such as laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and robotic surgery are commonly used for splenectomy, but the advantages in cases of splenomegaly are controversial.

REVIEW METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using PRISMA guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched up to February 2020.

RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included for meta-analysis. In relation to laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) versus open splenectomy (OS), 12 studies revealed a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (LOS) of 3.3 days (p = <0.01) in the LS subgroup. Operative time was higher by 44.4 min (p < 0.01) in the LS group. Blood loss was higher in OS 146.2 cc (p = <0.01). No differences were found regarding morbimortality. The global conversion rate was 19.56%. Five studies compared LS and hand-assisted laparosocpic splenectomy (HALS), but no differences were observed in LOS, blood loss, or complications. HALS had a significantly reduced conversion rate (p < 0.01). In two studies that compared HALS and OS (n = 66), HALS showed a decrease in LOS of 4.5 days (p < 0.01) and increase of 44 min in operative time (p < 0.01), while OS had a significantly higher blood loss of 448 cc (p = 0.01). No differences were found in the complication rate.

CONCLUSION: LS is a safe approach for splenomegaly, with clear clinical benefits. HALS has a lower conversion rate. Higher-quality confirmatory trials with standardized splenomegaly grading are needed before definitive recommendations can be provided. Prospero registration number: CRD42019125251.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app