Systematic review compares cholecystectomy techniques in diverse income settings, suggesting laparoscopic surgery is safer.
Background:We aimed to compare these approaches and examine how country income levels modify associations. Methods:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies from major databases through November 2024.We analyzed data from 85 studies comprising over 7.5 million patients.We utilized random-effects models to estimate risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD), and applied meta-regression to assess the influence of World Bank income classifications.Results: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.16; 95% CI: 0.13-0.18),complications (RR 0.46), and length of stay (-4.08 days) versus open surgery.Robotic surgery yielded no significant clinical benefits over LC.Crucially, meta-regression revealed that the mortality benefit of LC was significantly greater in low-and middle-income countries than in high-income nations.Conclusions: LC demonstrates superior safety and efficacy compared to open techniques, especially in resource-limited settings.Based on the available evidence, no demonstrable difference in outcomes was observed between robotic and laparoscopic approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Delpino et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: