We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety between laparoscopic reduction (LR) and open reduction (OR) of intussusception in infants and children. Literature searches were conducted to identify studies having compared LR and OR for children with intussusception failed to enema reduction. Parameters such as operative time, time to oral intake, length of hospital stay, overall postoperative complications, and recurrence were pooled and compared by meta-analysis. Among the 502 pediatric participants included in the 11 studies, 275 had received LR and 227 received OR. There were shorter length of hospital stays and time to oral intake with the LR approach compared with OR. However, no significant difference was found between LR and OR in the secondary outcome, such as the overall postoperative complications and recurrence. LR is a feasible, safe, and effective surgical procedure alternative to OR for pediatric intussusception. Compared with OR, LR has the advantage of shorter hospital stay and faster time to oral intake. Besides, the overall postoperative complications may be slightly lower in LR. We conclude that LR should be considered an acceptable option for children.

我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析，以比较腹腔镜复位（LR）和切开复位（OR）婴儿和儿童肠套叠的疗效和安全性。进行了文献检索，以确定比较 LR 和 OR 用于肠套叠儿童未能减少灌肠的研究。通过荟萃分析汇总和比较手术时间、口服摄入时间、住院时间、术后总体并发症和复发等参数。在 11 项研究的 502 名儿科参与者中，275 人接受了 LR，227 人接受了 OR。与 OR 相比，LR 方法的住院时间和口服摄入时间更短。然而，在次要结果中，LR 和 OR 之间没有显着差异，如整体术后并发症和复发。LR 是一种可行、安全、有效的手术方法，可替代 OR 治疗小儿肠套叠。与 OR 相比，LR 具有住院时间更短、经口摄入时间更快的优势。此外，LR 的总体术后并发症可能略低。我们得出结论，应将 LR 视为儿童可接受的选择。