Systematic review and meta-analysis of safety of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis in pregnancy (Br J Surg 2012; 99: 1470–1478)

Discordant outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy in published meta-analyses: an overview of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

Our study aimed to explore the discrepancy of results between overlapping systematic reviews (SRs) of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA) for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) were searched for SRs published from January 1, 2017 to September 10, 2019. SRs and meta-analyses (MA) that compared outcomes of LA versus OA during pregnancy were used. Data regarding the methodology of SR/MA, included studies, efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted. SR quality was analysed with AMSTAR 2.

RESULTS

Four SRs were found, published between April 2018 and April 2019. These reviews included a variety of primary studies, ranging from 17 to 22, and number of included patients varied from 4694 to 6276. A total of 13 outcomes were analyzed. Nine outcomes were included in more than one review; among them, discrepancies between summary effect sizes in meta-analyses were found in four outcomes: preterm birth, Apgar score at 5 min, length of stay in hospital, and wound infection rates. One primary study, which included more than half of the total number of patients in analyzed reviews, showed a predominant effect on the outcome for fetal loss. All four SRs had critically low methodological quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of LA versus OA for suspected appendicitis in pregnancy represented in four recent SRs do not provide consistent results. Such uncertainties require new, high-quality primary and secondary evidence on this topic.

Is the laparoscopic approach a safe choice for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnant women? A meta-analysis of observational studies

INTRODUCTION

Acute appendicitis is a common and serious situation during pregnancy, because of the increased risk of fetal loss and perforation in the third trimester, as well as a diagnostic difficulty. During recent years laparoscopic approach has been introduced to clinical practice with encouraging results. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the surgical and obstetrical outcomes between laparoscopic and open appendectomy during pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting on postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open appendectomy during pregnancy. The random effects model (DerSimonian-Laird) was used to calculate pooled effect estimates when high heterogeneity was encountered, otherwise the fixed-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model was implemented.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies that enrolled 6276 pregnant women are included in the present meta-analysis. Of these women, 1963 underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and 4313 underwent an open appendectomy. Women who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy demonstrated an increase in fetal loss risk, while neonates of women that underwent open appendectomy presented decreased Apgar score at five minutes after birth. All the rest outcomes were similar between the two groups. The time that each study took place seemed to affect the comparison of birth weight and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be a relatively safe therapeutic option in pregnancy when it is indicated. Thus, it should be implemented in clinical practice, always considering the experience of the surgeon in such procedures. Nevertheless, the need of new studies to enhance this statement remains crucial.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Pregnancy With Acute Appendicitis: Single Center Experience With World Review

OBJECTIVES

This clinical study is aiming to discuss the therapeutic benefit of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) by comparing with conventional open appendectomy (OA) in pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical data of 26 pregnant women who underwent appendectomy from 2012 to 2016 was retrospectively analyzed. The variables analyzed included baseline information, operation characteristics, maternal complications, and infant health outcomes. The patients were divided in 2 LA and OA groups according to the surgical approach and their clinical characteristics were compared.

RESULTS

Of reported 26 patients, 7 underwent LA whereas the remaining 19 patients underwent OA. The median age of the patients was 28 years (range, 19 to 39 y). The median gestational period was 21.5 weeks (range, 5 to 33 wk). The postoperative pathology showed complicated appendicitis 7 cases. The result showed significantly shorter operation time (42.14±8.63 vs. 65.21±26.58 min, P=0.003), hospital stay (4.14±1.77 vs. 6.47±2.72 d, P=0.021), and earlier recovery of gastrointestinal function in the LA group compared with OA group. There were no maternal and fetal deaths occurred in perioperative period in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LA has not increased morbidity and mortality but displayed shorter hospital stay, operation time and recovery of gastrointestinal function to OA as well as good cosmetic results. Therefore, LA in patients with pregnancy can be considered as preferred approach in sophisticated hands without increased risks.

Experimental use of a novel single-port gasless laparoendoscopic operative field formation device

INTRODUCTION

Traditional laparaendoscopic surgery using CO2 pneumoperitoneum is associated with complications and the existing gasless laparaendoscopic surgery has shortcomings such as poor visibility in the operation field. To overcome the disadvantages of the current lifting gasless laparaendoscopic operation platforms, we developed an inflatable device for gasless laparoscopic operation field formation (LOFF) that can be internally installed and applied in practice.

METHODS

We initially designed operation platforms for gasless laparaendoscopic single-port (GLESP) surgery. Subsequently, a triangular prismatic LOFF device was selected and applied successfully to GLESP cholecystectomy of five pigs. Ultimately, using pigs as a model, three surgical approaches (LOFF-assisted laparaendoscopic single-site (LOFF-LESS), LESS surgery, and traditional lifting (GLESP) were compared, and the advantages and drawbacks of inflatable devices for gasless laparoscopic operation field assessed.

RESULTS

The use of the LOFF device in GLESP cholecystectomy was first evaluated. The time for surgical space formation (4.4 ± 1.2 and 4.8 ± 1.0), the operating time for gallbladder removal (25.2 ± 4.8 and 25.4 ± 2.7), and the loss of blood (9.4 ± 3.1and 9.2 ± 2.4) was similar between LESS and LOFF, respectively (Table 2). In contrast these parameters were higher in GLESP (6.6 ± 1.0, 30.3 ± 4.4 and 10.1 ± 2.0, respectively. The LOFF-LESS surgery exhibited a clearer exposure of the surgical field and shorter operating time than the GLESP surgery. LESS technology showed less postoperation pain, fast recovery, and extremely high cosmetic satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The LOFF device provides a safe, effective, and feasible operation platform that can be internally installed and inflated for GLESP surgery during cholescytectomy in animal models.

Severe Complications of Laparoscopic and Conventional Appendectomy Reported to the Finnish Patient Insurance Centre

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is considered a safe operation, the related complications being minor. Negative exploration is an accepted procedure to avoid complications of appendicitis. Treatment with antibiotics is under debate as a primary treatment for appendicitis. The aim of this study was to collect and analyze detailed information on complications and morbidity related to appendectomy using the information of the nationwide Patient Insurance Association (PIA) database and to study the incidence of patient claims and compensated injuries related to appendectomy in Finland.

METHODS

Patients' claims from 1990 to 2010 were collected from the PIA register. Complications were classified using the accordion severity grading system. Severe complications were selected for more detailed analyses. Laparoscopic and open surgeries were compared. Factors related to compensated claims were assessed. For statistical analysis, Fisher's exact test, logistic multivariate regression, and the Mann-Kendall function were used.

RESULTS

Appendectomy complications leading to a patient insurance claim in Finland are rare (0.2 %). The rate of patients' claims after laparoscopic surgery was higher than after open surgery (p < 0.001), but the rate of compensated claims was equal. During the study period, complications after laparoscopic procedures more often led to additional surgery or organ failure (p = 0.03). Of the patients with a compensated injury, only 57 % had appendicitis. Preoperative computed tomography was used in only 6 % of these cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient injuries and claims regarding severe complications after appendectomy are rare. The complications related to laparoscopic appendectomy were more severe than those of open surgery.