SynthesisPediatric surgery international2024
Comprehensive meta-analysis of surgical procedure for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: thoracoscopic versus open repair.
Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Thoracoscopic versus open congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis by the Pediatric Surgery Meta-Analysis Study Group (PESMA).Pediatric surgery international · 2026Pooled it
- Perioperative monitoring in oesophageal atresia and congenital diaphragmatic hernia patients - exploring the impact of diagnosis on neurocardiovascular coupling.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePrevious studies have shown a higher recurrence rate and longer operative times for thoracoscopic repair (TR) of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) compared to open repair (OR). An updated meta-analysis was conducted to re-evaluate the surgical outcomes of TR.
methodsA comprehensive literature search comparing TR and OR in neonates was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement (PROSPERO: CRD42020166588).
resultsFourteen studies were selected for quantitative analysis, including a total of 709 patients (TR: 308 cases, OR: 401 cases). The recurrence rate was higher [Odds ratio: 4.03, 95% CI (2.21, 7.36), p < 0.001] and operative times (minutes) were longer [Mean Difference (MD): 43.96, 95% CI (24.70, 63.22), p < 0.001] for TR compared to OR. A significant reduction in the occurrence of postoperative bowel obstruction was observed in TR (5.0%) compared to OR (14.8%) [Odds ratio: 0.42, 95% CI (0.20, 0.89), p = 0.02].
conclusionsTR remains associated with higher recurrence rates and longer operative times. However, the reduced risk of postoperative bowel obstruction suggests potential long-term benefits. This study emphasizes the importance of meticulous patient selection for TR to mitigate detrimental effects on patients with severe disease.
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.