Abstract
Operative site wound infection is one of the most frequent infections in surgery. A variety of studies have shown that the results of laparoscopy might be superior to those of an open procedure. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of clarity as to whether there is a difference between open and laparoscopy with respect to the occurrence of wound infections in different paediatric operations. In this review, we looked at randomized, controlled studies that directly measured the rate of wound infection following an appendectomy with a laparoscope. We looked up four main databases for randomized, controlled studies that compare the treatment of paediatric appendicitis with laparoscopy. The surgeries included appendectomy. Through our search, we have determined 323 related papers and selected five qualified ones to be analysed according to the eligibility criteria. Five trials were also assessed for the quality of the documents. In the 5 trials, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of post-operative wound infection among the paediatric appendectomy and the open-access group (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-1.15, p = 0.13). The four trials did not show any statistically significant difference in abdominal abscesses among the laparoscopic and open-access treatment groups (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.90-3.01, p = 0.11). The four trials did not reveal any statistically significant difference in operating time (mean difference, -4.36; 95% CI, -17.31 to 8.59, p = 0.51). In light of these findings, the use of laparoscopy as compared with the open-approach approach in paediatric appendectomies is not associated with a reduction in the risk of wound infection.