Robotic versus Laparoscopic Liver Resections for Colorectal Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the liver is the most common localization of metastatic disease. The incidence of minimally invasive liver surgery is increasing, and robotic surgery (RLR) is believed to overcome some limitations of a laparoscopic approach (LRL). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of the laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. An online search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases was performed. Eight studies involving 3210 patients were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. In the LRL group, a higher conversion to open rate (12.4%) was observed compared to the RLR (6.7%; p = <0.001). 30-day mortality was 0.7% for the LRL group compared to 0.5% for the RLR group (p = 0.76). Mortality in longer periods among LLR and RLR amounted to 18.2% vs. 8.0% for 1-year mortality (p = 0.07), 34.1% vs. 26.7% for 2-year mortality (p = 0.13), and 52.3% vs. 48.3% for 3-year mortality (p = 0.46). The length of hospital stay was 5.6 ± 2.5 vs. 5.8 ± 2.1 days, respectively (p = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the incidence of individual complications in the LRL and RLR groups (p = 0.78). Laparoscopic or robotic approaches for colorectal liver metastases are comparable in terms of safety and effectiveness. There are significant advantages to robotic surgery, although there is still no long-term evidence concerning overall survival, and the number of patients operated on using RLR remains small.

Effect of COVID-19 on the prevalence of bystanders performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The importance of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrests is especially important in the context of coronavirus disease 2029 (COVID-19) because it can significantly influence survival outcomes. The objective of this meta-analysis was to examine the primary outcomes of bystander CPR during the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. METHODS: A search was conducted in the PubMed Central, Scopus, and EMBASE databases, as well as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database, up to December 10, 2023. In cases where the value of I² was greater than or equal to 50% or the Q-test indicated that the p-value was less than or equal to 0.05, the studies were considered to be heterogeneous. Sensitivity assessment was performed using the leave-one-out methodology. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO with the ID number CRD42023494912. RESULTS: Twenty-five articles were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that bystander CPR frequency during the COVID-19 pandemic was 38.8%, compared to 44.8% for the pre-pandemic period (odds ratio: 1.04; 95% confidence interval: 0.93-1.16; p = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: The article's conclusions indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced a reduction in bystander CPR compared to the pre-pandemic period, but this difference was not statistically significant. Further research is recommended to understand attitudes, including the fears of witnesses, before performing CPR on patients with suspected or confirmed infectious diseases. The study highlights the importance of bystander intervention in emergency situations and the impact of a pandemic on public health response behaviors.

CXCL5 and CXCL14, but not CXCL16 as potential biomarkers of colorectal cancer.

Experts emphasize that colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing. That is why its early detection is of the utmost importance. Patients with cancer diagnosed in earlier stages have a better prognosis and a chance for faster implementation of treatment. Consequently, it is vital to search for new parameters that could be useful in its diagnosis. Therefore, we evaluated the usefulness of CXCL5, CXCL14 and CXCL16 in serum of 115 participants (75 CRC patients and 40 healthy volunteers). Concentrations of all parameters were measured using Luminex. CRP (C-reactive protein) levels were determined by immunoturbidimetry, while levels of classical tumor markers were measured using CMIA (Chemiluminescence Microparticle Immunoassay). Concentrations of CXCL5 were statistically higher in the CRC group when compared to healthy controls. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) of CXCL5 and CXCL14 were higher than those of CA 19-9. Obtained results suggest the usefulness of CXCL5 and CXCL16 in the determination of distant metastases and differentiation between TNM (Tumor-Node-Metastasis) stages, as well as the usefulness of CXCL14 and CRP combination in CRC detection (primary or recurrence). However, further studies concerning their role in CRC progression are crucial to confirm and explain their diagnostic utility and clinical application as biomarkers.

The Significance of CXCL1 and CXCR1 as Potential Biomarkers of Colorectal Cancer.

The CXCL1/CXCR2 and CXCL8-CXCR1/CXCR2 axes are under intensive investigation as they appear to regulate the progression and invasion of colorectal cancer (CRC). Growing evidence demonstrates the elevated expression of these proteins in CRC. However, a majority of relevant studies have been performed on CRC tissues using immunohistochemical techniques. Our study is the first to evaluate the diagnostic significance of serum CXCL1 and CXCR1 levels in CRC patients in comparison to well-established tumor markers, such as the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and markers of inflammation, such as C-reactive protein (CRP). Thus, the aim of our study was to assess whether circulating serum levels of CXCL1 and CXCR1 might be candidates for novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and progression of CRC. The study was performed on 76 subjects, including patients with CRC and healthy volunteers as a control group. Serum concentrations of CXCL1, CXCR1, and the classical tumor marker (CEA) were measured using immunoenzyme assays, while CRP levels were assessed with the immunoturbidimetric method. Serum CXCL1 levels were statistically significantly increased in CRC patients when compared to healthy subjects, and similar results were found for CEA and CRP levels. The percentage of elevated concentrations of CXCL1 and CXCR1 was higher than that of the classical tumor biomarker and increased in the combined measurement of these proteins with CEA. In addition, among all proteins tested, serum CXCL1 seems to be the best indicator in the differentiation between CRC patients with nodal involvement and patients without the presence of lymph node metastasis. Our preliminary results indicate the role of serum CXCL1 and CXCR1 in the diagnosis of CRC, particularly in the combined measurement with CEA.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Pediatric Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic, required the donning of personal protective equipment during clinical contact, and continues to be a significant worldwide public health concern. Pediatric cardiac arrest is a rare but critical condition with a high mortality rate, the outcomes of which may be negatively affected by donning personal protective equipment. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric cardiac arrest outcomes. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from their inception to 1 October 2022. We included studies published in English on pediatric patients with cardiac arrest, dichotomized by the pre- and during-COVID-19 periods and then stratified by COVID-19 positive or negative status, to evaluate clinical outcomes associated with cardiac arrest. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis. In witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients, there were no differences between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods for witnessed cardiac arrest (28.5% vs. 28.7%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87 to 1.14; p = 0.93), administration of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (61.5 vs. 63.6%; OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.98 to 1.26; p = 0.11), bystander automated external defibrillator use (both 2.8%; OR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.69 to 1.45; p = 0.99), return of spontaneous circulation(8.4 vs. 8.9%; OR = 0.93; 95%CI: 0.47 to 1.88; p = 0.85), survival to hospital admission (9.0 vs. 10.2%, OR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.44; p = 0.47), or survival to hospital discharge (13.4 vs. 12.4%; OR = 0.62; 95%CI: 0.22 to 1.72; p = 0.35). COVID-19 did not change pediatric cardiac arrest bystander interventions or outcomes.

The Significance of Selected C-C Motif Chemokine Ligands in Colorectal Cancer Patients.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most frequently diagnosed neoplasms. Despite the advances in diagnostic tools and treatments, the number of CRC cases is increasing. Therefore, it is vital to search for new parameters that could be useful in its diagnosis. Thus, we wanted to assess the usefulness of selected CC chemokines (CCL2, CCL4, and CCL15) in CRC. The study included 115 subjects (75 CRC patients and 40 healthy volunteers). The serum concentrations of all parameters were measured using a multiplexing method (Luminex). The CRP levels were determined by immunoturbidimetry, and the classical tumor markers (CEA and CA 19-9) were measured using CMIA (chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay). The concentrations of all parameters were higher in the CRC group when compared to the healthy controls. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) of all estimated CC chemokines were higher than those of CA 19-9. Interestingly, the obtained results also suggest CCL2's significance in the determination of local metastases and CCL4's significance in the determination of distant metastases. However, further studies concerning the role of selected CC chemokines in the course of colorectal cancer are necessary to confirm and to fully clarify their diagnostic utility and their clinical application as markers of CRC development.

Statins and the risk of pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 2,797,186 patients.

BACKGROUND: Statin use in many studies is related to the improvement of a patients' condition including reducing the risk of various malignancies. Herein, is a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the evidence on the association between statin therapy and the risk of the occurrence of pancreatic cancer, mainly in terms of decreased risk of developing pancreatic cancer among patients using statin therapy in the long-term perspective. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from database inception to December 1st, 2021. Random effect models were used to estimate summary odds ratios (OR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: A total of 26 studies comprising 2,797,186 patients were included. Polled analysis showed that pancreatic cancer occurrence in statin vs. no-statin group varied and amounted to 0.4% vs. 0.6% (RR = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72-0.96; I² = 84%; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the present analysis shows that overall statins use is significantly associated with a reduction in risk of pancreatic cancer. However, these results were not confirmed for the randomized controlled trial subgroup. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the current results.

Safety and Efficacy of Indocyanine Green in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 11,047 Patients.

Despite the technological advances and improved surgical skills, the incidence of anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery still ranges from 4% to 19%. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of indocyanine green (ICG) use in colorectal cancer surgery. An online search of the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases (from inception to 10 November 2021) was performed, in addition to manual screening. Thirty-two studies involving 11,047 patients were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. The anastomotic leak rate in the ICG and non-ICG groups varied and amounted to 3.7% vs. 7.6%, respectively (RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.39-0.56; p < 0.001). The rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was 8.1% in the ICG group compared with 12.1% in the non-ICG group (RR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.46-0.98; p = 0.04). In non-RCTs, it equaled 3.1% vs. 7.3%, respectively (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.35-0.52; p < 0.001). Although the publications encompassed in our meta-analysis present different patients, with different factors influencing the results, a pooled analysis revealed a lower incidence of anastomotic leak in cases with ICG use. There are several other convincing advantages: safety, simplicity, and short time of the method adjustment. The presented meta-analysis indicates ICG perfusion assessment as a tool worth considering to decrease the rate of complications following colorectal surgery-valuable in the context of other, well-known risk factors.

Efficacy and safety of hypertonic saline solutions fluid resuscitation on hypovolemic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Fluid resuscitation is a fundamental intervention in patients with hypovolemic shock resulting from trauma. Appropriate fluid resuscitation in trauma patients could reduce organ failure, until blood components are available, and hemorrhage is controlled. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effect of hypertonic saline/dextran or hypertonic saline for fluid resuscitation on patient outcomes restricted to adults with hypovolemic shock. METHODS: We conducted a search of electronic information sources, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and bibliographic reference lists to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating outcomes of crystalloids versus colloids in patients with hypovolemic shock. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) of groups using fixed or random-effect models. RESULTS: Fifteen studies including 3264 patients met our inclusion criteria. Survival to hospital discharge rate between research groups varied and amounted to 71.2% in hypertonic saline/dextran group vs. 68.4% for isotonic/normotonic fluid (normal saline) solutions (odds ratio [OR] = 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.45; I2 = 48%; p = 0.09). 28- to 30-days survival rate for hypertonic fluid solutions was 72.8% survivable, while in the case of isotonic fluid (normal saline) - 71.4% (OR = 1.13; 95% CI 0.75-1.70; I2 = 43%; p = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis, which included only evidence from RCTs hypertonic saline/dextran or hypertonic saline compared with isotonic fluid did not result in superior 28- to 30-day survival as well as in survival to hospital discharge. However, patients with hypotension who received resuscitation with hypertonic saline/dextran had less overall mortality as patients who received conventional fluid.

Effectiveness and safety of hypotension fluid resuscitation in traumatic hemorrhagic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Although the resuscitation of an adult trauma patient has been researched and written about for the past century, the ideal fluid strategy to infuse during the initial resuscitation period remains unresolved. This work was aimed at assessing the effect of hypotensive versus conventional resuscitation strategies in traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients on mortality, and the need for blood transfusions including adverse events. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the effect of hypotension versus conventional fluid resuscitation for traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients. Two reviewers independently performed the screening, data extraction, and bias assessment. The data analysis was completed using the Cochrane Collaboration's software RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Data from 28 RCTs on 4503 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. Patients receiving hypotension fluid resuscitation compared with conventional fluid resuscitation experienced less mortality (12.5% vs. 21.4%; RR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.51-0.66; p < 0.001), fewer adverse events (10.8% vs. 13.4%; RR = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.59-0.83; p < 0.001), including fever acute respiratory distress syndrome (7.8% vs. 16.8%) or multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (8.6% vs. 21.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that hypotensive fluid resuscitation significantly reduced the mortality of hypovolemic shock patients. Findings are low in certainty and should be interpreted with caution. Therefore, there is an urgent need for larger, multicenter, randomized trials to confirm these findings.

Eotaxins and Their Receptor as Biomarkers of Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies. Despite the availability of diagnostic tests, an increasing number of new cases is observed. That is why it is very important to search new markers that would show high diagnostic utility. Therefore, we made an attempt to assess the usefulness of eotaxins, as there are few studies that investigate their significance, in patients with CRC. The study included 80 subjects (CRC patients and healthy volunteers). Serum concentrations of all eotaxins were measured using a multiplexing method (Luminex), while CCR3 was measured by immunoenzymatic assay (ELISA). CRP levels were determined by immunoturbidimetry and classical tumor marker levels (CEA and CA 19-9) and were measured using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). The highest usefulness among the proteins tested showed CCR3. Its concentrations were significantly higher in the CRC group than in healthy controls. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of CCR3 were higher than those of CA 19-9. The maximum values for sensitivity, negative predictive value, and AUC were obtained for a combination of CCR3 and CRP. Our findings suggest the potential usefulness of CCR3 in the diagnosis of CRC, especially in combination with CRP or CEA.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival Rate: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a challenge for medical staff, especially in the COVID-19 period. The COVID-19 disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is highly infectious, thus requiring additional measures during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Since CPR is a highly aerosol-generating procedure, it carries a substantial risk of viral transmission. We hypothesized that patients with diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 might have worse outcomes following OHCA outcomes compared to non-COVID-19 patients. To raise awareness of this potential problem, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that reported OHCA in the pandemic period, comparing COVID-19 suspected or diagnosed patients vs. COVID-19 not suspected or diagnosed group. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge (SHD). Secondary outcomes were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission or survival with favorable neurological outcomes. Data including 4210 patients included in five studies were analyzed. SHD in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients were 0.5% and 2.6%, respectively (odds ratio, OR = 0.25; 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.12, 0.53; p < 0.001). Bystander CPR rate was comparable in the COVID-19 vs. not COVID-19 group (OR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.22; p = 0.43). Shockable rhythms were observed in 5.7% in COVID-19 patients compared with 37.4% in the non-COVID-19 group (OR = 0.19; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.96; p = 0.04; I2 = 95%). ROSC in the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients were 13.3% vs. 26.5%, respectively (OR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.81; p < 0.001). SHD with favorable neurological outcome was observed in 0% in COVID-19 vs. 3.1% in non-COVID-19 patients (OR = 1.35; 95% CI: 0.07, 26.19; p = 0.84). Our meta-analysis suggests that suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 reduces the SHD rate after OHCA, which seems to be due to the lower rate of shockable rhythms in COVID-19 patients, but not due to reluctance to bystander CPR. Future trials are needed to confirm these preliminary results and determine the optimal procedures to increase survival after OHCA in COVID-19 patients.

Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients.

Robotic-assisted surgery is expected to have advantages over standard laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to 10 November 2021, for both RCTs and observational studies comparing robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Forty-Two were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% for RG and 98.8% for LG (OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.43; p = 0.05). Time to first flatus in the RG group was 2.5 ± 1.4 days and was statistically significantly shorter than in LG group (2.9 ± 2.0 days; MD = -0.34; 95%CI: -0.65 to 0.03; p = 0.03). In the case of time to a liquid diet, solid diet and bowel movement, the analysis showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Length of hospital stay in the RG vs. LG group varied and amounted to 8.0 ± 5.3 vs. 9.5 ± 10.0 days (MD = -2.01; 95%CI: -2.90 to -1.11; p < 0.001). Overall, 30-days complications in the RG and LG groups were 27.2% and 19.0% (OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.80 to 1.55; p = 0.53), respectively. In summary, robotic-assisted techniques provide several advantages over laparoscopic techniques in reducing operative time, significantly lowering conversion of the procedure to open surgery, shortening the duration of hospital stay, lowering the risk of urinary retention, improving survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated by emergency medical service teams during COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a challenge for medical personnel, especially in the current COVID-19 pandemic, where medical personnel should perform resuscitation wearing full personal protective equipment. This study aims were to assess the characteristics and outcomes of adults who suffered an OHCA in the COVID-19 pandemic treated by emergency medical service (EMS) teams. METHODS: All EMS-attended OHCA adults over than 18 years in the Polish EMS registry were analyzed. The retrospective EMS database was conducted. EMS interventions performed between March 1, and April 30, 2020 were retrospectively screened. RESULTS: In the study period EMS operated 527 times for OHCA cases. The average age of patients with OHCA was 67.8 years. Statistically significantly more frequently men were involved (64.3%). 298 (56.6%) of all OHCA patients had resuscitation attempted by EMS providers. Among resuscitated patients, 73.8% were cardiac etiology. 9.4% of patients had return of spontaneous circulation, 27.2% of patients were admitted to hospital with ongoing chest compression. In the case of 63.4% cardiopulmonary resuscitation was ineffective and death was determined. CONCLUSIONS: The present study found that OHCA incidence rate in the Masovian population (central region of Poland) in March-April 2020 period was 12.2/100,000 adult inhabitants. Return of spontaneous circulation in EMS was observed only in 9.4% of resuscitated patients. The presence of shockable rhythms was associated with better prognosis. The prehospital mortality, even though it was high, did not differ from those reported by other studies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis appraising efficacy and safety of adrenaline for adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: There is a beneficial effect of adrenaline during adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) from cardiac arrest but there is also uncertainty about its safety and effectiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of adrenaline versus non-adrenaline CPR. METHODS: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and Google Scholar databases were searched from their inception up to 1st July 2020. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and risk of bias, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference of groups were calculated using fixed or random-effect models. RESULTS: Nineteen trials were identified. The use of adrenaline during CPR was associated with a significantly higher percentage of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) compared to non-adrenaline treatment (20.9% vs. 5.9%; RR = 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-2.55; p < 0.001). The use of adrenaline in CPR was associated with ROSC at 19.4% and for non-adrenaline treatment - 4.3% (RR = 3.23; 95% CI 1.89-5.53; p < 0.001). Survival to discharge (or 30-day survival) when using adrenaline was 6.8% compared to non-adrenaline treatment (5.5%; RR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.76-1.30; p = 0.97). However, the use of adrenaline was associated with a worse neurological outcome (1.6% vs. 2.2%; RR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.42-0.78; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that resuscitation with adrenaline is associated with the ROSC and survival to hospital discharge, but no higher effectiveness was observed at discharge with favorable neurological outcome. The analysis showed higher effectiveness of ROSC and survival to hospital discharge in non-shockable rhythms. But more multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed in the future.

A Comparison of Two Approaches to Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: Lateral Transperitoneal Versus Posterior Retroperitoneal Approach.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of benign adrenal masses. It is most commonly performed using the lateral transperitoneal approach (LTA) and the posterior retroperitoneal approach (PRA). The choice of the method depends on contraindications for a particular approach in an individual case and surgical experience. The objective of the article is to compare two approaches, LTA and PRA, in view of our own experience and literature review. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the article is to compare two approaches, LTA and PRA, in view of our own experience and literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The assessment involved morphological characteristics of tumors, indications for PRA and LTA, operative time, perioperative blood loss and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Seventy-seven of the examined 104 laparoscopic adrenalectomies were performed retroperitoneally; 27 - transperitoneally. The mean size of tumors in PRA was 4.6 cm and in LTA 6.2 cm. The mean total operative time was 91.8 min in the case of PRA and 153.1 min in LTA. No differences in the amount of blood loss between the two approaches were recorded. The average hospitalization post PRA lasted 2.03 days and post LTA 2.67 days. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy proves to be an effective and safe surgical technique both in the case of LTA and PRA. The technique to be used should be suited to surgical team's experience, patient's general condition and tumor size and location. In our experience, the most advantageous approach in the case of tumors of less than 7 cm is PRA.