Flap versus fascial closure for gastroschisis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Flap closure represents an alternative to fascial closure for gastroschisis. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes comparing these techniques.

METHODS

A registered systematic review (

PROSPERO

CRD42015016745) of comparative studies was performed, querying multiple databases without language or date restrictions. Gray literature was sought. Outcomes analyzed included: mortality, ventilation days, feeding parameters, length of stay (LOS), wound infection, resource utilization, and umbilical hernia incidence. Multiple reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and literature quality. Meta-analysis of outcomes was performed where appropriate (Revman 5.2).

RESULTS

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, of which three were multi-institutional. Quality assessment revealed unbiased patient selection and exposure, but group comparability was suboptimal in four studies. Overall, 1124 patients were evaluated, of which 350 underwent flap closure (210 immediately; 140 post-silo). Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in mortality, LOS, or feeding parameters between groups. Flap patients had less wound infections (OR 0.40 [95%CI 0.22-0.74], P=0.003). While flap patients had an increased risk of umbilical hernia, they were less likely to undergo repair (19% vs. 41%; P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Flap closure has equivalent or superior outcomes to fascial closure for patients with gastroschisis. Given potential advantages of bedside closure and reduced sedation requirements, flap closure may represent the preferred closure strategy.