SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2015
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in patients with suspected appendicitis: a systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 84 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Investigation of Oxidative Stress - Open Appendectomy (OAE) Versus Laparoscopic Appendectomy (LAE) in Childhood and Adolescence - A Pilot Study
Instillation of Bupivacaine With Epinephrine Over Diaphragm to Reduce Postoperative Shoulder Pain Following Benign Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Control Trial
Who cites it
84 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Missing data handling in pediatric appendectomy research: current practices and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic vs. open feeding jejunostomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic surgery: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BJS open · 2023Pooled it
- Neurogenic appendicopathy: an underestimated disease-systematic review of the literature.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopy versus open appendectomy for elderly patients, a meta-analysis and systematic review.BMC surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Effect of intraperitoneal infusion of ropivacaine combined with dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a single-center randomized double-blinded controlled trial.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Trial
- Clinical prediction score for superficial surgical site infection after appendectomy in adults with complicated appendicitis.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2018Trial
- The fascial involvement score retains diagnostic value for complicated appendicitis on CT when specific signs are absent.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of RIPASA versus modified Alvarado score in acute appendicitis: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study from a tertiary centre in India.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis with periappendiceal abscess versus without abscess in children: a prospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis: is interval appendectomy an effective strategy?Surgery today · 2026Article
- Efficacy of the LigaSure system vs UltraCision harmonic scalpel in laparoscopic appendectomy for the management of acute appendicitis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- A Case Report of Acute Appendicitis Complicated by Appendicoliths.Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Efficacy of Standardized Care for Abdominal Drainage Tubes in the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Risk factors of abdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral systematic reviews (SRs) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open appendectomy have been published, but there has been no overview of SRs of these two interventions. This overview (review of review) aims to summarise the results of such SRs in order to provide the most up to date evidence, and to highlight discordant results.
methodsMedline, Embase, Cinahl, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for SRs published up to August 2014. Study selection and quality assessment using the AMSTAR tool were carried out independently by two reviewers. We used standardised forms to extract data that were analysed descriptively.
resultsNine SRs met the inclusion criteria. All were of moderate to high quality. The number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) they included ranged from eight to 67. The duration of surgery pooled by eight reviews was 7.6 to 18.3 minutes shorter using the open approach. Pain scores on the first postoperative day were lower after laparoscopic appendectomy in two out of three reviews. The risk of abdominal abscesses was higher for laparoscopic surgery in half of six meta-analyses. The occurrence of wound infections pooled by all reviews was lower after laparoscopic appendectomy. One review showed no difference in mortality. The laparoscopic approach shortened hospital stay from 0.16 to 1.13 days in seven out of eight meta-analyses, though the strength of the evidence was affected by strong heterogeneity.
conclusionLaparoscopic and open appendectomy are both safe and effective procedures for the treatment of acute appendicitis. This overview shows discordant results with respect to the magnitude of the effect but not to the direction of the effect. The evidence from this overview may prove useful for the development of clinical guidelines and protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.