ライフサイエンスコーパス: laparoscopic

1 ical treatment modality (65.4%), followed by laparoscopic (31.2%) and robotic surgeries (3.4%).

2 underwent elective colorectal resection (26% laparoscopic, 74% open), 5.3% of patients developed SBO

3 al study compared outcomes of 72662 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations between HSHs (4-5 star

4 d have similar outcomes as LSHs for advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations.

5 atient outcomes and resource use in advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery compared with low-star ho

6 Patients who underwent advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery, including bariatric surg

7 ality between HSHs and LSHs for any advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

8 Rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with permanent c

9 s (n = 161), sleeve gastrectomy (n = 67), or laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (n = 14).

10 Pregnant women with a laparoscopic adjustable gastric band are high risk; the

11 m (UKOSS) on all pregnancies in women with a laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, booking in UK mate

12 following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) are not w

13 rwent RYGB compared with those who underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB).

14 eatments (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB] or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding [LAGB]) followed

15 Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding has been demonst

16 excess weight reduction ranges from 49% for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding to 76% for Roux-

17 n-Y gastric bypass and 509 who had undergone laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.

18 Laparoscopic and open appendectomy are both safe and eff

19 The laparoscopic and open approaches to proctectomy in patie

20 Standard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the c

21 ence in costs between patients who underwent laparoscopic and open colectomy, the key drivers were a

22 the differences in Medicare expenditures for laparoscopic and open colectomy.

23 ompared risk-adjusted rates of SBO following laparoscopic and open colorectal resection.

24 ensity score matching on the 2 main cohorts (laparoscopic and open groups) and also on the study subg

25 he perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liv

26 In a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open mesh repair, 133 patients were ass

27 were statistically equivalent (P > 0.05) for laparoscopic and open procedures.

28 were statistically equivalent (P > 0.05) for laparoscopic and open procedures.

29 ose who had minimally invasive hysterectomy (laparoscopic and robot-assisted).

30 Utilization of laparoscopic and robotic LAR for rectal cancer has stead

31 Laparoscopic and robotic surgeries were associated with

32 ee main surgical treatment modalities (open, laparoscopic and robotic).

33 ts with rectal cancer by 3 approaches: open, laparoscopic, and robotic.

34 re and including 2655 patients who underwent laparoscopic antireflux surgery according to the Swedish

35 etermine the risk of reflux recurrence after laparoscopic antireflux surgery and to identify risk fac

36 Primary laparoscopic antireflux surgery due to gastroesophageal

37 Reflux recurrence after laparoscopic antireflux surgery has not been assessed in

38 Laparoscopic antireflux surgery was associated with a re

39 Among patients who underwent primary laparoscopic antireflux surgery, 17.7% experienced recur

40 Laparoscopic appendectomy (35.2%) and laparoscopic chole

41 and outcome after open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) over the last 21 years.

42 linical benefit to children undergoing acute laparoscopic appendectomy and cannot be recommended in t

43 Laparoscopic appendectomy has rare but relevant complica

44 local anesthetic (IPLA) on pain after acute laparoscopic appendectomy in children.

45 This randomized controlled trial in acute laparoscopic appendectomy recruited children aged 8 to 1

46 vein removal, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, thyroidecto

47 ctions pooled by all reviews was lower after laparoscopic appendectomy.

48 LA would improve recovery in pediatric acute laparoscopic appendectomy.

49 o determine the either an open approach or a laparoscopic approach (including procedures converted to

50 s study was to assess whether association of laparoscopic approach and full fast track multimodal (FF

51 However, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach appear to fade with increasing age

52 Placement of a prosthetic mesh by the laparoscopic approach following the modified Sugarbaker

53 Increased utilization of a laparoscopic approach has the potential to achieve a sig

54 The pure laparoscopic approach in right hepatectomy (LRH) for liv

55 Laparoscopic approach is still considered a challenging

56 nt to which these differences are due to the laparoscopic approach itself or selection bias from heal

57 g questions regarding the true impact of the laparoscopic approach on this diverse group of elderly p

58 The laparoscopic approach produced less risk of subhepatic c

59 The Laparoscopic Approach to Cancer of the Endometrium (LACE

60 Our team introduced the laparoscopic approach to live donation in 2002, and the

61 The advantages seen with the laparoscopic approach were reproduced in the 70 to 74-ye

62 Addition of FFT multimodal management to laparoscopic approach with early oral intake and mobiliz

63 er colorectal cancer surgery, as compared to laparoscopic approach with limited fast-track program (L

64 es appear to influence outcomes only for the laparoscopic approach.

65 ase might be due to challenges inherent with laparoscopic approaches in patients with distended small

66 The rate of laparoscopic approaches increased more than 3-fold durin

67 the study was to report 10+ year outcome of laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal swi

68 Diagnostic laparoscopic biopsy was performed during the first trime

69 imary objective was to test the ability of a laparoscopic camera system to detect the fluorescent sig

70 community centers combined to perform 80% of laparoscopic cases and 83% of robotic cases.

71 Fifteen laparoscopic cases were converted (5.2%).

72 for open CBDE (30.6% vs 5.5%; P < .001) and laparoscopic CBDE (9.2% vs 3.0%; P < .001) independently

73 e marked decline in the use of both open and laparoscopic CBDE in the United States as well as the be

74 bserved General Surgery residents performing laparoscopic cholecystectomies using the Objective Struc

75 Laparoscopic appendectomy (35.2%) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (19.3%) were the most commo

76 pic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC) vs laparoscopic c

77 all-incision open cholecystectomy (SIOC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) concerning costs and h

78 wing evidence in support of performing early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystiti

79 re clinical outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in acute cholecystitis

80 y with sentinel lymph node biopsy (PM SLNB), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), laparoscopic inguinal

81 paroscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC).

82 f the present trial was to ascertain whether laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCC) can prevent recurrent

83 a resource limited country, the expansion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy has transformed the care of

84 Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within 2 days of

85 ective review of the transition from open to laparoscopic cholecystectomy throughout Mongolia.

86 idents, and 5 attendings) reviewed simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos, determined the next

87 idents, and 5 attendings) reviewed simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos, determined the next

88 : 42% for total knee arthroplasty to 96% for laparoscopic cholecystectomy).

89 nd nontechnical performance standard for the laparoscopic cholecystectomy, (2) assess the classificat

90 n of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes: laparoscopic cholecystectomy, biliary tract disorders, p

91 bsets of patients with pancreatic resection, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, colectomy, and appendectom

92 clinical outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, comparing them with patien

93 d on abdominal MRI performed two years after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, in a patient with only a m

94 ones for the majority of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, IOUS is cost-effective rel

95 gical procedures (ie, varicose vein removal, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy,

96 , many tumors are discovered incidentally at laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

97 outcomes of hospitals in inpatient Medicare laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

98 cavity may rarely occur during the course of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

99 eaths, and 90-day readmissions for inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

100 eaths, and 90-day readmissions for inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

101 using standard methods, patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (vs open) had lower total Medicar

102 patient characteristics, patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (vs open) still had lower Medicar

103 Laparoscopic colectomy is safe and effective in the trea

104 day hospital costs between elective open and laparoscopic colon and rectal cancer resection in a dail

105 Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery were randomized i

106 For laparoscopic colorectal resections, the benefit of epidu

107 cation score to facilitate case selection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery training was developed a

108 r outside the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, 2 external data sets we

109 tabase of the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, between July 2008 and J

110 t be recommended as part of ERAS pathways in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

111 th laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC) vs laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparosco

112 Laparoscopic DN decreased the need for intraoperative bl

113 Laparoscopic DN was associated with a higher probability

114 Laparoscopic DN was associated with an older (P < 0.001)

115 2759 open DN (ODNs), 1190 hand-assisted (HA) laparoscopic DNs (LDNs), 203 pure LDN (P-LDNs), and 97 r

116 classified as TFI cases or controls based on laparoscopic examination.

117 ted (intention-to-treat analysis), including laparoscopic extended hemihepatectomies and hemihepatect

118 Our report contrasts the endoscopic and laparoscopic findings in malignant atrophic papulosis wh

119 e modifications, proton pump inhibitors, and laparoscopic fundoplication are proven treatment modalit

120 tion and technical elements for a successful laparoscopic fundoplication have been clearly identified

121 Laparoscopic fundoplication, magnetic sphincter augmenta

122 on pump inhibitors, open fundoplication, and laparoscopic fundoplication.

123 Clinical trials comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus traditional open ga

124 study period, Medicare paid $470 million for laparoscopic gastric band associated procedures, of whic

125 stric bypass, open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic gastric band placement, or laparoscopic sle

126 device-related reoperations occurring after laparoscopic gastric band surgery as well as the associa

127 US Food and Drug Administration approval for laparoscopic gastric band surgery in 2001, as many as 96

128 ion of medical comorbidities at 1 year after laparoscopic gastric bypass.

129 with variations in short-term outcomes after laparoscopic gastric bypass.

130 dy was designed to investigate the impact of laparoscopic gastric mobilization (LGM) on 30-day postop

131 Fewer patients in the laparoscopic group (12 of 43; 27.9%) than in the Hartman

132 .1%) of 235 patients in the robotic-assisted laparoscopic group (unadjusted risk difference = 1.1% [9

133 of 230 patients (12.2%) in the conventional laparoscopic group (unadjusted risk difference = 4.1% [9

134 After 12 months, 3 patients in the laparoscopic group and 11 in the Hartmann group had a st

135 4 (6.3%) of 224 patients in the conventional laparoscopic group and 12 (5.1%) of 235 patients in the

136 236 patients (8.1%) in the robotic-assisted laparoscopic group and 28 of 230 patients (12.2%) in the

137 Event-free recovery was seen in 85% in the laparoscopic group and in 65% of the open cases (P < 0.0

138 (days) within 12 months was shorter for the laparoscopic group than the Hartmann group, with a reduc

139 nsidered as treatment option comparable with laparoscopic Heller myotomy for any of the achalasia syn

140 mparable with prior studies of both POEM and laparoscopic Heller myotomy.

141 analysis demonstrated a learning curve of 55 laparoscopic hemihepatectomies for conversions.

142 ver resections, 159 patients underwent total laparoscopic hemihepatectomy (105 right and 54 left).

143 ility of a short and safe learning curve for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy could potentially benefit t

144 Conclusions and Relevance: Total laparoscopic hemihepatectomy is a feasible and safe proc

145 Importance: Widespread implementation of laparoscopic hemihepatectomy is currently limited by its

146 extent and safety of the learning curve for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy.

147 l bleeding from the hepatic vein during pure laparoscopic hepatectomy; however, there is a risk of pu

148 at a tertiary referral center specialized in laparoscopic hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery.

149 er robot-assisted hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy (23.7% v 19.5%; P = .03).

150 To investigate whether total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) is equivalent to total a

151 These findings support the use of laparoscopic hysterectomy for women with stage I endomet

152 l abdominal hysterectomy compared with total laparoscopic hysterectomy resulted in equivalent disease

153 vaginal hysterectomy, and 1458 (19.0%) had a laparoscopic hysterectomy.

154 ting centres and perianal fistula to receive laparoscopic ileocaecal resection or infliximab.

155 We compared laparoscopic ileocaecal resection with infliximab to ass

156 uitable for three-dimensional endoscopic and laparoscopic imaging, as was demonstrated on ex vivo por

157 PM SLNB), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIH), and open ingu

158 strategy employed the use of keywords "3D," "Laparoscopic," "Laparoscopy," "Performance," "Education,

159 with superior oncologic outcomes compared to laparoscopic LAR.

160 Laparoscopic lavage alone has been suggested as definiti

161 were randomized, out of whom 39 patients in laparoscopic lavage and 36 patients in the Hartmann proc

162 To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic lavage and sigmoid resection in perforated

163 43 and 40 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic lavage and the Hartmann procedure with a me

164 Randomization between laparoscopic lavage and the Hartmann procedure.

165 In this trial, laparoscopic lavage as treatment for patients with perfo

166 Morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic lavage did not differ when compared with th

167 bserved in 31 of 101 patients (30.7%) in the laparoscopic lavage group and 25 of 96 patients (26.0%)

168 ary for perforated diverticulitis (12 in the laparoscopic lavage group vs 13 in the colon resection g

169 Laparoscopic lavage has been suggested as a less invasiv

170 Cohort studies have suggested that laparoscopic lavage may treat perforated diverticulitis

171 Laparoscopic lavage reduced the need for reoperations, h

172 Laparoscopic lavage resulted in shorter operating time,

173 Laparoscopic lavage used in the management of Hinchey gr

174 Laparoscopic lavage was compared with colon resection an

175 ted that patients can be safely managed with laparoscopic lavage, resulting in reduced mortality and

176 included 307 patients of whom 159 underwent laparoscopic lavage.

177 r the study period, 164 patients underwent a laparoscopic Linx implant and had a median follow-up of

178 TCA was induced by laparoscopic liver lobe resection combined with arterial

179 The effects of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resect

180 Laparoscopic liver resection has been associated with le

181 In patients over 70 years of age laparoscopic liver resection, for colorectal liver metas

182 5 vs. 8 days, P = 0.001) were observed after laparoscopic liver resection.

183 lected single-center database containing all laparoscopic liver resections performed in our unit at t

184 Results: Of a total of 531 consecutive laparoscopic liver resections, 159 patients underwent to

185 survival between MI-LAR and OLAR and between laparoscopic (LLAR) and robotic LAR (RLAR).

186 idence concerning the pathologic outcomes of laparoscopic (LRR) vs open (ORR) rectal resection for re

187 Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions for adhesive SBO (aSBO)

188 Surgeons should approach laparoscopic lysis of adhesions with a higher level of a

189 % CI, -9.1% to -0.5%]) and for patients with laparoscopic mesh repair (10.6% [95% CI, 9.2%-12.1%]; ri

190 ad open nonmesh repair (11.3%), and 1757 had laparoscopic mesh repair (54.2%).

191 repair was 62 (IQR, 44-79) months, and after laparoscopic mesh repair was 61 (IQR, 48-78) months.

192 nce over 5 years compared with open mesh and laparoscopic mesh repair.

193 5% CI, 2.8%-4.6%) for patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh repair.

194 [95% CI, 4.4%-6.2%]; open nonmesh repair vs laparoscopic mesh repair: risk difference, 3.4% [95% CI,

195 th pneumatic dilation (70%-90% effective) or laparoscopic myotomy (88%-95% effective).

196 ome of a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) and conventiona

197 Laparoscopic operations have steadily increased.

198 nducted of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing laparoscopic or open colectomy between January 1, 2010,

199 d after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection.

200 went ODP (n = 472) or MIDP (n = 456) using a laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach, 24% for pancrea

201 Adults undergoing MIS (laparoscopic or robotic) or open rectal resections for s

202 , often using minimally invasive approaches (laparoscopic or robotic).

203 uding celiac ganglionectomy as well as open, laparoscopic, or robotic intervention.

204 Surgical intervention involves open, laparoscopic, or robotic ligament release; celiac gangli

205 Individual laparoscopic performance in 3D may be affected by a mult

206 All 5 consecutive donors completed a pure laparoscopic procedure.

207 Laparoscopic procedures are generally thought to have be

208 Laparoscopic procedures for aSBO are associated with a g

209 In general, laparoscopic procedures have a lower risk of morbidity a

210 es (TMC), defined categories, and four index laparoscopic procedures was evaluated.

211 Patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures were younger with fewer comorbid

212 mesh-related complications for both open and laparoscopic procedures.

213 tional examination of open proctectomy (OP), laparoscopic proctectomy (LP), and robotic proctectomy (

214 stablished ERP (median age 63, 57% male, 80% laparoscopic) randomized 1:1 to usual care (including pr

215 assisted (n = 237) or conventional (n = 234) laparoscopic rectal cancer resection, performed by eithe

216 device, and to report the results of 1-stage laparoscopic removal and fundoplication.

217 Laparoscopic removal of the Linx device can be safely pe

218 The discussion about a similar benefit for laparoscopic repair is ongoing, but concerns exist about

219 Overall, laparoscopic repair of PEH with biological mesh results

220 The question whether laparoscopic resection (LR) compared with open surgery [

221 Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; me

222 th stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection fail

223 Laparoscopic resection has developed as a commonly accep

224 INTERPRETATION: Laparoscopic resection in patients with limited (disease

225 Laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer is widely us

226 Laparoscopic resection resulted in the largest cost redu

227 In patients >/=75 years and ASA I-II, laparoscopic resection was associated with 46% less mort

228 For colon cancer surgery (N = 4202), laparoscopic resection was significant less expensive th

229 y future randomized studies, we believe that laparoscopic resection with intracorporeal anastomosis a

230 The laparoscopic retrieval of the left lateral section for l

231 -guided radiofrequency ablation (CT-RFA) and laparoscopic RFA (L-RFA) have been used to treat intrahe

232 study included 159 patients in whom a total laparoscopic right or left hemihepatectomy procedure was

233 l hernia (IH) in patients who have undergone laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and to develop dec

234 We simulated the benefits and harms of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery in patient

235 approved study of patients who had undergone laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with surgically co

236 iagnosis of morbid obesity and who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, open Roux-en-Y ga

237 G) is performed almost as often in Europe as laparoscopic Roux-Y-Gastric Bypass (LRYGB).

238 Laparoscopic RYGB results in highly favorable outcomes w

239 r follow-up, including 335 open RYGB and 316 laparoscopic RYGB.

240 nia rates were expectedly higher in open (vs laparoscopic) RYGB (16.9% vs 4.7%; P = 0.02).

241 Despite equivalent exposure to practical laparoscopic skills training, video-based coaching enhan

242 was to assess long-term metabolic effects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with t

243 arding best surgical techniques to use for a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) including the use

244 Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) increases transpla

245 Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is performed almos

246 dly obese subjects before and 3 months after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

247 Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is an upcoming proc

248 ass, laparoscopic gastric band placement, or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

249 The distinction between open (OS) and laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) was analyzed.

250 cal technique (open or laparoscopic), use of laparoscopic staplers, and overall duration of postopera

251 For rectal cancer surgery (N=2328), all laparoscopic subgroups had significantly higher total ho

252 88% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons, which is greater than in the gene

253 74% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons.

254 se in open surgeries, a 3.5 fold increase in laparoscopic surgeries, and a 41.3 fold increase in robo

255 omerular filtration rate (eGFR) with PPCs in laparoscopic surgeries.

256 eal abscess were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic surgery (n = 30) or conservative treatment

257 Although laparoscopic surgery accounts for >2 million surgical pr

258 l comparing robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among 471 patients with rectal aden

259 Five recurrences occurred after laparoscopic surgery and 1 in the open group (P < 0.112)

260 .In univariable logistic regression analyses laparoscopic surgery and male sex predicted an event-fre

261 However, robust evidence to conclude that laparoscopic surgery and open surgery have similar outco

262 emodynamic and physiological consequences of laparoscopic surgery as well as a defined operative plan

263 with T1-T3 rectal tumors, noninferiority of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery for succ

264 omise oncologic and functional outcome after laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer and seems as

265 To compare robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery for risk of conversion to open lapa

266 on was complete in 206 patients (87%) in the laparoscopic surgery group and 216 patients (92%) in the

267 argin was clear in 222 patients (93%) in the laparoscopic surgery group and in 228 patients (97%) in

268 argin was clear in 236 patients (99%) in the laparoscopic surgery group and in 234 patients (99%) in

269 Advancements in laparoscopic surgery have primarily focused on enhancing

270 However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery imposes greater ergonomic constrain

271 s, a national project for the development of laparoscopic surgery was organised.

272 cluding patients with advanced tumor grades, laparoscopic surgery was still associated with better ou

273 bilateral incisional wounds (>/=10 mm) after laparoscopic surgery were randomized to receive acute tr

274 tor antagonists) and surgical therapies (eg, laparoscopic surgery).

275 ents were grouped by approach [open surgery, laparoscopic surgery, and robotic surgery (RS)] on an in

276 ble for curative resection, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, as compared with conventional lapa

277 During laparoscopic surgery, carbon dioxide insufflation may pr

278 copic surgery, as compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, did not significantly reduce the r

279 prevalence of MSDs among surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery, we performed a systematic review o

280 These findings suggest that robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, when performed by surgeons with va

281 for long-term complications in both open and laparoscopic surgery.

282 vent-free recovery occurred frequently after laparoscopic surgery.

283 ransanal total mesorectal excision (TME) and laparoscopic surgery.

284 s, without substantial outcome benefits over laparoscopic surgery.

285 l of 1044 patients were included (699 in the laparoscopic-surgery group and 345 in the open-surgery g

286 video-based coaching enhanced the quality of laparoscopic surgical performance on both VR and porcine

287 epair using mesh performed by either open or laparoscopic techniques vs open repair without use of me

288 The effectiveness of laparoscopic TME could not be established, but the robot

289 effect was even greater when characterizing laparoscopic-to-open conversions as an open approach (SB

290 ltrapro) vs a heavyweight (Prolene) mesh for laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia

291 To examine the feasibility of using laparoscopic TPIAT (L-TPIAT) in the treatment of CP.

292 tal tumor <2 cm from anorectal junction, and laparoscopic transabdominal posterior dissection to <4 c

293 h is needed to develop barriers suitable for laparoscopic use.

294 ngth of surgery, surgical technique (open or laparoscopic), use of laparoscopic staplers, and overall

295 g evidence with regard to rates of SBO after laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery.

296 andomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open appendectomy have been publishe

297 bowel intervention was 53.5% versus 43.4% in laparoscopic versus open procedures (P < 0.0001).

298 account for selection bias between choice of laparoscopic versus open resection.

299 , wound classification), procedure type (eg, laparoscopic vs open, intestinal, foregut, hepatopancrea

300 ve comorbidities, operative characteristics (laparoscopic vs. open), postoperative complications, ann