SynthesisThe British journal of surgery2026
Trimester-specific safety of laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery during pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The British journal of surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent guidelines endorse laparoscopy for non-obstetric abdominal surgery during pregnancy regardless of trimester but recent data suggest trimester-specific fetal risks. The aim of this study was to compare the maternal and fetal safety of laparoscopic versus open surgery, focusing on trimester-specific and pathology-stratified outcomes.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (2026 CRD420261295995). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for comparative studies (RCTs and cohort studies) of laparoscopic versus open surgery for acute appendicitis, gallstone disease, and adnexal masses. Random-effects meta-analysis synthesized data on fetal loss, preterm delivery, maternal complications, and length of hospital stay.
resultsIn total, 22 studies comprising 28 160 pregnant women (15 786 of whom underwent laparoscopic surgery and 12 374 of whom underwent open surgery) were included. Laparoscopy was associated with a higher risk of fetal loss than open surgery (OR 2.02 (95% c.i. 1.40 to 2.92); P < 0.001). A first-trimester subgroup analysis showed a persistent trend toward higher fetal loss with laparoscopy (OR 1.35 (95% c.i. 0.84 to 2.19)). Laparoscopy reduced preterm delivery (OR 0.56 (95% c.i. 0.34 to 0.94); P = 0.020) and maternal complications (OR 0.45 (95% c.i. 0.30 to 0.68); P < 0.001). Trimester-specific analysis revealed a significantly elevated risk of composite adverse fetal outcomes for laparoscopy during the second trimester (OR 2.35 (95% c.i. 1.15 to 4.77); P = 0.020) and a similar trend in the third trimester.
conclusionLaparoscopy confers maternal benefits and reduces preterm delivery but is associated with higher fetal loss and elevated composite adverse outcomes in the second trimester.
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.