scholarly journals Open Versus Endoscopic Surgical Treatment of Posterior Ankle Impingement: A Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110049
Author(s):  
Ruben Zwiers ◽  
Thymen Miedema ◽  
Johannes I. Wiegerinck ◽  
Leendert Blankevoort ◽  
C. Niek van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Endoscopic Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Aofas Score ◽  
Endoscopic Techniques ◽  
Full Activity ◽  
Ankle Impingement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Posterior Ankle Impingement

Background: Surgical treatment of symptomatic posterior ankle impingement consists of resection of the bony impediment and/or debridement of soft tissue. Historically, open techniques were used to perform surgery with good results. However, since the introduction of endoscopic techniques, advantages attributed to these techniques are shorter recovery time, fewer complications, and less pain. Purpose: The primary purpose was to determine whether endoscopic surgery for posterior ankle impingement was superior to open surgery in terms of functional outcome (American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society [AOFAS] score). The secondary aim was to determine differences in return to full activity, patient satisfaction, and complications. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE (Classic), and CINAHL databases were searched. Publication characteristics, patient characteristics, surgical techniques, AOFAS scores, time to return to full activity, patient satisfaction, and complication rates were extracted. The AOFAS score was the primary outcome measure. Data were synthesized, and continuous outcome measures (postoperative AOFAS score and time to return to full activity) were pooled using a random-effects inverse variance method. Random-effects meta-analysis of proportions using continuity correction methods was performed to determine the proportion of patients who were satisfied and who experienced complications. Results: A total of 32 studies were included in this review. No statistically significant difference was found in postoperative AOFAS scores between open surgery (88.0; 95% CI, 82.1-94.4) and endoscopic surgery (94.4; 95% CI, 93.1-95.7). There was no difference in the proportion of patients who rated their satisfaction as good or excellent, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.96) versus 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94), respectively. No significant difference in time to return to activity was found, 10.8 weeks (95% CI, 7.4-15.9 weeks) versus 8.9 weeks (95% CI, 7.6-10.4 weeks), respectively. Pooled proportions of patients with postoperative complications were 0.15 (95% CI, 0.11-0.19) for open surgery versus 0.08 (95% CI, 0.05-0.14) for endoscopic surgery. Without the poor-quality studies, this difference was statistically significant for both total and minor complications, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.14-0.35) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.00-0.06) and 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09-0.20) versus 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.05), respectively. Conclusion: We found no statistically significant difference in postoperative AOFAS scores, patient satisfaction, and return to preinjury level of activity between open and endoscopic techniques. The proportion of patients who experienced a minor complication was significantly lower with endoscopic treatment when studies of poor methodological quality were excluded.

Outcomes of Concurrent Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery and Rhinoplasty: A Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 194589242098067
Author(s):  
Benjamin F. Bitner ◽  
Karthik R. Prasad ◽  
Khodayar Goshtasbi ◽  
Brandyn S. Dunn ◽  
Edward C. Kuan
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Endoscopic Sinus Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery ◽  
Sinus Surgery ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Medical Problems ◽  
Random Effects Models ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Significant Difference

Introduction Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and functional nasal airway obstruction are common but distinct medical problems which affect quality of life. In certain instances, patients often benefit from concomitant functional septorhinoplasty, or elect for cosmetic rhinoplasty, in addition to functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and prefer combining procedures. Determining outcomes of combined surgery is important when discussing risks and benefits with patients. Methods A thorough literature search of articles published in PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Patients were categorized as either having FESS or rhinoplasty alone or combined. Binary random-effects models were applied to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for outcomes including complications, recurrence, and satisfaction. Results Of the 55 screened articles, 6 were included in the analysis, and of these, 6 (405 patients), 2 (90 patients), 4 (290 patients), and 3 (190 patients) provided data for postoperative complications, recurrence of CRS symptoms, revision rates, and patient satisfaction, respectively. Major complications were observed in 11 (5.8%) total combined cases, 0 (0%) FESS cases, and 6 (3.5%) rhinoplasty cases with no statistical difference between combined cases and rhinoplasties (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.45–4.16, p = 0.58). Recurrence of CRS symptoms was noted in 35.6% combined cases and 28.9% FESS cases (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.55–3.64, p = 0.47). There was no observed difference in revision rates between combined and isolated rhinoplasties (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.43–2.32, p = 1). Lastly, 91.6% of patients were satisfied with results of combined cases compared to 87.4% of patients in standalone cases (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.61–4.03, p = 0.35). Conclusion Aggregate evidence demonstrates similar risk in complication rates in combined surgical cases compared to stand-alone rhinoplasty. There appears to be no significant difference in recurrence of symptoms, revision rates or patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals Three and Five-Year Mortality in Ovarian Cancer after Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Floriane Jochum ◽  
Muriel Vermel ◽  
Emilie Faller ◽  
Thomas Boisrame ◽  
Lise Lecointre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Advanced Stages

As regards ovarian cancer, the use of minimally invasive surgery has steadily increased over the years. Reluctance persists, however, about its oncological outcomes. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the three and five-year mortality of patients operated by minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for ovarian cancer to those operated by conventional open surgery (OPS), as well as their respective perioperative outcomes. PubMed, Cochrane library and CinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched, using the terms laparoscopy, laparoscopic or minimally invasive in combination with ovarian cancer or ovarian carcinoma. We finally included 19 observational studies with a total of 7213 patients. We found no statistically significant difference for five-year (relative risk (RR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.53–1.49, p = 0.62)) and three-year mortality (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.80–1.12, p = 0.52) between the patients undergoing MIS and those operated by OPS. When five and three-year recurrences were analyzed, no statistically significant differences were also observed. Analysis in early and advanced stages subgroups showed no significant difference for survival outcomes, suggesting oncological safety of MIS in all stages. Whether the surgery was primary or interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer, did not influence the comparative results on mortality or recurrence. Although the available studies are retrospective, and mostly carry a high risk for bias and confounding, an overwhelming consistency of the evidence suggests the likely effectiveness of MIS in selected cases of ovarian cancer, even in advanced stages. To validate the use of MIS, the development of future randomized interventional studies should be a priority.

scholarly journals Minimally invasive spine surgery for adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. E7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Dangelmajer ◽  
Patricia L. Zadnik ◽  
Samuel T. Rodriguez ◽  
Ziya L. Gokaslan ◽  
Daniel M. Sciubba
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Cobb Angle ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgical ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Lateral Interbody

Object Historically, adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) has been treated with multilevel decompression and instrumented fusion to reduce neural compression and stabilize the spinal column. However, due to the profound morbidity associated with complex multilevel surgery, particularly in elderly patients and those with multiple medical comorbidities, minimally invasive surgical approaches have been proposed. The goal of this meta-analysis was to review the differences in patient selection for minimally invasive surgical versus open surgical procedures for adult DLS, and to compare the postoperative outcomes following minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery. Methods In this meta-analysis the authors analyzed the complication rates and the clinical outcomes for patients with adult DLS undergoing complex decompressive procedures with fusion versus minimally invasive surgical approaches. Minimally invasive surgical approaches included decompressive laminectomy, microscopic decompression, lateral and extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), and percutaneous pedicle screw placement for fusion. Mean patient age, complication rates, reoperation rates, Cobb angle, and measures of sagittal balance were investigated and compared between groups. Results Twelve studies were identified for comparison in the MIS group, with 8 studies describing the lateral interbody fusion or XLIF and 4 studies describing decompression without fusion. In the decompression MIS group, the mean preoperative Cobb angle was 16.7° and mean postoperative Cobb angle was 18°. In the XLIF group, mean pre- and postoperative Cobb angles were 22.3° and 9.2°, respectively. The difference in postoperative Cobb angle was statistically significant between groups on 1-way ANOVA (p = 0.014). Mean preoperative Cobb angle, mean patient age, and complication rate did not differ between the XLIF and decompression groups. Thirty-five studies were identified for inclusion in the open surgery group, with 18 studies describing patients with open fusion without osteotomy and 17 papers detailing outcomes after open fusion with osteotomy. Mean preoperative curve in the open fusion without osteotomy and with osteotomy groups was 41.3° and 32°, respectively. Mean reoperation rate was significantly higher in the osteotomy group (p = 0.008). On 1-way ANOVA comparing all groups, there was a statistically significant difference in mean age (p = 0.004) and mean preoperative curve (p = 0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between groups (p = 0.28). Conclusions The results of this study suggest that surgeons are offering patients open surgery or MIS depending on their age and the severity of their deformity. Greater sagittal and coronal correction was noted in the XLIF versus decompression only MIS groups. Larger Cobb angles, greater sagittal imbalance, and higher reoperation rates were found in studies reporting the use of open fusion with osteotomy. Although complication rates did not significantly differ between groups, these data are difficult to interpret given the heterogeneity in reporting complications between studies.

scholarly journals De Novo Vesicoureteral Reflux Following Ureterocele Decompression in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Laser Puncture versus Electrosurgical Incision Techniques

Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Sachit Anand ◽  
Tanvi Goel ◽  
Apoorv Singh ◽  
Nellai Krishnan ◽  
Prabudh Goel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Endoscopic Techniques ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Black Scale ◽  
Secondary Procedures ◽  
Cold Knife ◽  
Low Incidence

Background: The available endoscopic techniques for ureterocele decompression include laser puncture (LP), electrosurgical incision (ES), and cold-knife incision. This systematic review was performed to compare the efficacy of LP versus ES techniques with special emphasis on de novo VUR. Methods: Four databases were systematically searched by the authors. The inclusion criteria were all comparative studies in which ureterocele decompression was performed by either LP or ES endoscopic techniques. Outcomes including the incidence of de novo VUR, the need for endoscopic retreatment of the ureterocele, and the need for secondary surgical procedures were studied. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for all outcomes and the Mantel-Haenszel method was utilized for the estimation of pooled RR. The methodological quality was assessed by the Downs and Black scale. Results: Five studies were considered for systematic review, while four of them were included in the meta-analysis. Out of 202 children, 67 developed de novo VUR. Significantly lower rates of reflux were observed in the LP group vis-a-vis ES group (RR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.32, p < 0.00001). Endoscopic retreatment rates (n = 20) demonstrated no significant difference among the two patient groups (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.26–1.68, p = 0.38). A total of 46 secondary procedures were performed in 170 children, mostly ureteral re-implantations, with a significantly lower need of secondary surgeries following LP versus ES (RR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.13–0.49, p < 0.0001). The risk of bias in the included studies was low-to-moderate. Conclusions: When compared to the ES technique, the LP technique is associated with a significantly low incidence of de novo VUR and requirement for secondary surgeries (particularly anti-reflux surgeries). Endoscopic retreatment rates showed no significant difference between the two techniques. However, due to the moderate risk of bias in two out of four included studies, randomized controlled trials are needed in the future.

scholarly journals Comparison of Postoperative Visual Performance Between Bifocal and Trifocal Intraocular Lens Based on Randomized Controlled Trails: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanshan Jin ◽  
David S. Friedman ◽  
Kai Cao ◽  
Mayinuer Yusufu ◽  
Jingshang Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Visual Performance ◽  
Posterior Capsular Opacification ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background：To compare the clinical performance of bifocal and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials was conducted. Methods: A comprehensive literature retrieval of PubMed, Science Direct and EMBASE was performed in this systematic review. Clinical outcomes included visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction. Results: There were 8 RCTs included in this study. The difference of uncorrected near VA (UNVA) between the bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs had no clinical significance [MD=-0.01, 95%CI: (-0.02,0.00)]. There was no significant difference in the distant-corrected near VA (DCNVA) with MD of 0.04 [95%CI (-0.02, 0.10)]. Compared with trifocal group, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) [MD=0.09,95%CI:(0.01,0.17)] was significantly worse in the bifocal group. No difference was found in distance-corrected intermediate VA(DCIVA) [MD= 0.09, 95%CI: (-0.04, 0.23)] between two groups. Analysis on AT LISA subgroup indicated the bifocal group had worse intermediate VA than trifocal group (AT LISA tri 839M) [MD= 0.18, 95%CI: (0.12, 0.24) for UIVA and MD= 0.19, 95%CI: (0.13, 0.25) for DCIVA]. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the uncorrected distance VA(UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) [MD=0.01, 95%CI: (-0.01,0.04) for UDVA; MD=0.00, 95%CI: (-0.01,0.01) for CDVA]. The postoperative refraction of bifocal group was similar to that of trifocal group [MD=-0.08, 95% CI: (-0.19, 0.03) for spherical equivalent; MD=-0.09, 95%CI: (-0.21, 0.03) for cylinder; MD=-0.09, 95% CI: (-0.27, 0.08) for sphere]. No difference was found for spectacle independence, posterior capsular opacification (PCO) incidence and patient satisfaction between bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs. [RR=0.89, 95% CI: (0.71, 1.12) for spectacle independence; RR=1.81, 95% CI: (0.50, 6.54) for PCO incidence; RR=0.98, 5% CI: (0.86, 1.12) for patient satisfaction]. Conclusion: Patients receiving trifocal IOLs, especially AT LISA tri 839M, have a better intermediate VA than those receiving bifocal IOLs. Near and distance visual performance, spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction of bifocal IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs. Keywords: bifocal; trifocal; intraocular lenses; cataract surgery; randomized; IOLs; meta-analysis.

scholarly journals Primary Arthrodesis Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Outcomes for Lisfranc Injuries: An Analysis of Conflicting Meta-analysis Results

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0038
Author(s):  
Wesley D. Peters ◽  
Vinod K. Panchbhavi
Keyword(s):  
Open Reduction ◽  
Postoperative Infection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Aofas Score ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Anatomic Reduction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Lisfranc Injuries

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: The superiority of Primary arthrodesis (PA) versus open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in Lisfranc injuries has been debated for decades. In recent years, researchers have attempted to use meta-analyses to reach a definitive conclusion. However, they have reached uncertain and contradicting conclusions when comparing these treatment options, which has led to more confusion. The goal of this paper is to navigate the primary source data of each meta-analyses to determine why different conclusions were reached and provide surgeons with more clarity on the comparable outcomes of PA and ORIF treatment options in Lisfranc injuries. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted by searching for ‘meta-analysis’ AND ‘Lisfranc’ with keywords such as ‘ORIF’ OR ‘open reduction’ OR ‘Arthrodesis’ OR ‘fusion’. Five meta-analysis articles discussing PA and ORIF in Lisfranc injuries were identified. Study outcomes were extracted from each article for comparison. Contradicting conclusions were identified, and the primary sources used by each meta-analysis was analyzed. Results: All meta-analyses agreed that PA had lower rates of hardware removal and that there is no significant difference between PA and ORIF when considering revision surgery, anatomic reduction, postoperative infection, total complications, and patient satisfaction. However, contradicting conclusions were reached regarding functional patient outcomes such as return to duty, the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Conclusion: PA has favorable rates of hardware removal compared to ORIF, while no difference between PA and ORIF was found for revision surgery, anatomic reduction, postoperative infection, total complications, and patient satisfaction.While certain meta-analyses had contradicting conclusion as to which treatment option is favorable for returning to duty, AOFAS score, and VAS score, it was determined there was no significant difference in PA and ORIF for return to work and VAS score. Repeat meta- analysis with truly equivocal outcomes would be necessary to reach a valid conclusion for return to full activity and AOFAS midfoot scores.

scholarly journals Management of Fractures Shaft of Tibia in Adult Interlocking Nailing Versus Plating in: A Comparative Study

KYAMC Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
Md Ashraful Islam ◽  
Md Abdur Rashid ◽  
Md Rafiqul Islam ◽  
Md Hafizur Rahman Milon ◽  
Md Kaiser Mahmud
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Bone Fractures ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Functional Results ◽  
Long Bone ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Interlocking Nailing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Diaphyseal Fractures

Background: Tibial shaft fractures are the commonest long bone fractures in adults, most commonly managed by intramedullary interlocking nailing. However, several meta-analysis show that locking plate osteosynthesis is equally effective in managing tibial diaphyseal fractures and are associated with less number of complications. Aim: To compare the results of fixation of tibial fractures followingplating and nailing in terms of union, patient satisfaction and complications. Materials and Methods: Khwaja Yunus Ali Medical College and Hospital based non randomized clinical trial was performed from September 2014 to August 2017 where closed or open diaphyseal or metaphyseo- diaphyseal fractures of the tibia (closed or open Gustilo Anderson type 1 through 3B) were included. Simple sequential allocation was used for allotting the patients to two groups, one for interlocking nailing and other for plating. The patients were followed up for clinical, radiographic and functional results. Results: Forty patients with 41 involved limbs completed followup for one year. in our study was 19.55±0.69 weeks in case of interlocking nailing and 20.38±1.39 weeks in case of plating and there was no statistically significant difference between the two. Conclusion: There was no difference between the twomodalities in terms of fracture union. Complications were lesser but more serious in case of plating. Patient satisfaction was more with plating. KYAMC Journal Vol. 10, No.-2, July 2019, Page 99-105

Effect of Metatarsus Adductus on Hallux Valgus Treated With Proximal Reverse Chevron Metatarsal Osteotomy

2021 ◽  
pp. 107110072199036
Author(s):  
Seung-Myung Choi ◽  
Jong-Soo Lee ◽  
Jung-Won Lim ◽  
Je-Min Im ◽  
Duk-Hwan Kho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Hallux Valgus ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Metatarsal Osteotomy ◽  
Aofas Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Metatarsus Adductus ◽  
The Mean

Background: This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes and recurrence rates after reverse proximal chevron metatarsal osteotomy (PCMO) for patients with hallux valgus (HV) with or without metatarsus adductus (MA). We hypothesized that patients with MA would have poorer outcomes and a higher radiographic recurrence rate than those without MA. Methods: This retrospective single-surgeon series comprised 144 patients (173 feet) with moderate to severe HV, treated with PCMO and Akin osteotomy without lesser metatarsal procedures, who were grouped according to the presence (MA group) or absence of MA (non-MA group). Clinical assessment included the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, pain visual analog scale (VAS), and patient satisfaction rating. Radiographic assessments included metatarsus adductus angle (MAA), HV angle (HVA), and intermetatarsal angle (IMA). Results: The prevalence of the MA was 24.2%. The mean MAA was 23.1 ± 3.3 degrees in the MA group. There were no differences in the mean AOFAS score and pain VAS score at the final follow-up between the 2 groups (all P > .05). The patient satisfaction rate was 73.8% in the MA group vs 90.1% in the non-MA group ( P = .017). The mean postoperative HVA and IMA significantly improved at the final follow-up in both groups, respectively (all P < .001). Preoperative and postoperative HVA were larger in the MA group vs non-MA group. However, no significant difference was found in the improvement of HVA and IMA after surgery between the 2 groups (all P > .05). The recurrence rate was 28.6% in the MA group and 6.1% in the non-MA group ( P < .001). Conclusion: HV patients associated with the MA had a higher degree of preoperative HV, lower correction of the HVA, higher radiographic recurrence rate, and poorer patient satisfaction than those without MA post-PCMO without lesser metatarsal procedures. Therefore, a more extensive HV correction procedure or the addition of a lesser metatarsal realignment procedure may need to be considered. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative series.

scholarly journals Oxycodone versus other opioid analgesics after laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Li ◽  
Zhi Dou ◽  
Liqiang Yang ◽  
Qi Wang ◽  
Jiaxiang Ni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Visceral Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Opioid Analgesics ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Intravenous opioids are administered for the management of visceral pain after laparoscopic surgery. Whether oxycodone has advantages over other opioids in the treatment of visceral pain is not yet clear. Methods In this study, the analgesic efficiency and adverse events of oxycodone and other opioids, including alfentanil, sufentanil, fentanyl, and morphine, in treating post-laparoscopic surgery visceral pain were evaluated. This review was conducted according to the methodological standards described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched in December 2019. Results Ten studies were included in this review. The sample size was 695 participants. The results showed that compared with morphine and fentanyl, oxycodone had a more potent analgesic efficacy on the first day after laparoscopic surgery, especially during the first 0.5 h. There was no significant difference in sedation between the two groups. Compared to morphine and fentanyl, oxycodone was more likely to lead to dizziness and drowsiness. Overall, patient satisfaction did not differ significantly between oxycodone and other opioids. Conclusions Oxycodone is superior to other analgesics within 24 h after laparoscopic surgery, but its adverse effects should be carefully considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document