Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy in Children: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Aziz, Omer, Athanasiou, Thanos, Tekkis, Paris P., Purkayastha, Sanjay, Haddow, James, Malinovski, Vitali, Paraskeva, Paraskevas, Darzi, Ara·2006·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

In Brief Objective: This study aims to use meta-analysis to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy in a pediatric population. Summary Background Data: Meta-analysis is a statistical tool that can be used to evaluate the literature in both qualitative and quantitative ways, accounting for variations in characteristics that can influence overall estimate of outcomes of interest. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in a pediatric population has not previously been performed. Methods: Comparative studies published between 1992 and 2004 of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children were included. Endpoints were postoperative pyrexia, ileus, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess formation, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: Twenty-three studies including 6477 children (43% laparoscopic, 57% open) were included. Wound infection was significantly reduced with laparoscopic versus open appendectomy (1.5% versus 5%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27–0.75), as was ileus (1.3% versus 2.8%; OR = 0.5, 95% CI, 0.29–0.86). Intra-abdominal abscess formation was more common following laparoscopic surgery, although this was not statistically significant. Subgroup analysis of randomized trials did not reveal significant difference between the 2 techniques in any of the 4 complications. Operative time was not significantly longer in the laparoscopic group, and postoperative stay was significantly shorter (weighted mean difference, −0.48; 95% CI, −0.65 to −0.31). Sensitivity analysis identified lowest heterogeneity when only randomized studies were considered, followed by prospective, recent, and finally large studies. Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that laparoscopic appendectomy in children reduces complications. However, we also see the need for further high-quality randomized trials comparing the 2 techniques, matched not only for age and sex but also for obesity and severity of appendicitis. This study uses meta-analytic techniques to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children. Twenty-three comparative studies, including 6477 children (43% laparoscopic, 57% open) published between 1992 and 2004 were included. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with reduced incidence of wound infection, ileus, and length of stay when compared with open surgery in a pediatric population.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.sla.0000193602.74417.14

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 15 references

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
Aziz, O., Athanasiou, T., Tekkis, P. P., Purkayastha, S., Haddow, J., Malinovski, V., Paraskeva, P., & Darzi, A.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2006-01
Volume
243
Issue
1
Pages
17-27
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090905163
Cited by
332
References
15
FWCI
12.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy in Children: A Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000193602.74417.14
The paper
Aziz, O., Athanasiou, T., Tekkis, P. P., Purkayastha, S., Haddow, J., Malinovski, V., Paraskeva, P., & Darzi, A. (2006). Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy in Children: A Meta-Analysis. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000193602.74417.14

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.