Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in inflammatory bowel disease in pediatric and young adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, and indeterminate colitis, often necessitates surgical intervention in cases of severe or refractory disease. Although biologic therapies have significantly reduced the need for surgery, operative management remains essential for certain patients. The choice between laparoscopic (laparoscopy group [LG]) and open conventional surgery (open group [OG]) continues to be a subject of debate. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes of LG and OG in pediatric patients with IBD.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies comparing LG and OG outcomes in pediatric patients with IBD. Key outcomes analyzed included major and minor postoperative complications, reoperations, readmissions, operative time, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, analyzing 3417 patients, with 1399 (41%) undergoing OG and 2018 (59%) undergoing LG. Our analysis revealed no significant differences in major postoperative complications, reoperation, and readmissions between LG and OG (P = .114, P = .082, and P = .641, respectively). However, LG was associated with shorter hospital stays (6.04 vs 8.35 days; P < .05). Conversions from LG to open surgery amounted to a total of 153 (7.57%). Open surgery had a significantly shorter operative time (173.8 vs 195.5 min; P = .005).

CONCLUSION

Both laparoscopic and open conventional surgeries are safe, effective, and reliable in managing pediatric IBD. Although open surgery offers shorter operative times, laparoscopy reduces hospital stay and minor postoperative complications. The choice of approach depends on the surgeon's experience and patient-specific factors.