ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy versus open: a study in 1999 pregnant patients.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Trimester-specific safety of laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery during pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Swedish national guidelines for diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in adults and children.BJS open · 2025Guideline
- Optimal treatment strategies for gallbladder disease in pregnancy: a systematic review with dual network meta-analyses.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- SAGES guidelines for the use of laparoscopy during pregnancy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Updated Evaluation of Laparoscopic vs. Open Appendicectomy During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Is the laparoscopic approach a safe choice for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnant women? A meta-analysis of observational studies.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2019Pooled it
- Evidence-Based Guideline on Laparoscopy in Pregnancy: Commissioned by the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE) Endorsed by the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (RCOG).Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2019Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Successful interval laparoscopic appendectomy for walled-off perforated appendicitis during pregnancy: a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- The impact of laparoscopic cholecystectomy on pregnancy outcomes in the United States.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Common bile duct exploration with choledochotomy and primary repair during pregnancy: Case Report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Open versus laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pregnancy: a population-based study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Review
- Intraoperative Hypertension Is Associated with Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury after Laparoscopic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Pancreatitis in Pregnancy-Comprehensive Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- The Future in Standards of Care for Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery to Improve Training and Education.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Management of Complicated Appendicitis During Pregnancy in the US.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Parturient with Acute Abdomen.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhen pregnant patients require surgery, whether to perform an operation open or laparoscopic is often debated. We evaluated the impact of laparoscopy for common general surgical problems in pregnancy to determine safety and trends in operative approach over time.
methodsPregnant patients undergoing appendectomy or cholecystectomy were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. We analyzed demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes. Univariate comparison and multivariate regression analysis (MVA) were performed adjusting for confounding factors: age, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, and smoking, and an additional MVA was performed for perforated cases.
resultsA total of 1999 pregnant patients between 2005 and 2012 were evaluated. Of 1335 appendectomies, 894 were performed laparoscopically (LA) and 441 open (OA). For 664 cholecystectomies, 606 were laparoscopic (LC) and 58 open (OC). There were no deaths. For LA versus OA, patient characteristics were not different {age: 27.7 vs. 28.2 years, p = 0.19; diabetes: 1.8 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.24; smoking: 19 vs. 16.1%, p = 0.2} except for BMI (27.9 vs. 28.4 kg/m(2); p = 0.03). LA had shorter operative times (ORT), length of stay (LOS), and fewer postoperative complications compared to OA. In MVA, difference between approaches remained statistically significant for ORT (<0.0001), LOS (<0.01), and wound complications (<0.01). MVA was performed for perforated cases alone: LA had equal ORT (p = 0.19) yet shorter LOS (p = <0.001). The majority of LA were performed in the last 4 years versus the first 4 years (61 vs. 39%, p < 0.001). For LC versus OC, patient characteristics were not different: age (28.3 vs. 28.7 years; p = 0.33), BMI (31.4 vs. 33.2 kg/m(2), p = 0.25), diabetes (2.8 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.68), and smoking (21.1 vs. 25.9%, p = 0.4). LC had a shorter ORT, LOS, and fewer postoperative complications than OC. In MVA, the difference between approaches remained statistically significant for ORT (<0.0001), LOS (<0.0001), and minor complications (<0.01). In MVA for cholecystitis with perforation, no difference was seen for LOS, ORT, or postoperative complications (p > 0.05). The percentage of LC cases appeared to increase over time (89 vs. 93%, p = 0.06).
conclusionWhile fetal events are unknown, LA and LC in pregnant patients demonstrated shorter ORT, LOS, and reduced complications and were performed more frequently over time. Even in perforated cases, laparoscopy appears safe in pregnant patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26091987What 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.