Safety of laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy

Mastering nonobstetric surgery in pregnancy: Insights, guidelines evaluation, and point-by-point discussion

For surgeons and clinicians, nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy has certain difficulties and considerations. In order to aid in decision-making in these situations, this manuscript offers a thorough review of the guidelines currently in place from renowned obstetric and surgical societies, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, and others. Using AGREE II-S methodology, a comprehensive analysis of guidelines reveals differences in recommendations for anesthetics, surgical procedures, imaging modalities, and thromboembolic prophylaxis. Furthermore, a thorough discussion of strategic surgical planning is provided, covering aspects such as patient positioning, trocar placement, pneumoperitoneum generation, and thromboembolic risk management. The publication highlights that in order to maximize the results for both the mother and the fetus after nonobstetric surgery performed during pregnancy, a multidisciplinary approach and evidence-based decision-making are essential.

SAGES guidelines for the use of laparoscopy during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations for pregnant patients presenting with common surgical pathologies including appendicitis, biliary disease, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee convened a working group to address these issues. The group generated five key questions and completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. An expert panel then met to form evidence-based recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Expert opinion was utilized when the available evidence was deemed insufficient.

RESULTS

The expert panel agreed on ten recommendations addressing the management of appendicitis, biliary disease, and IBD during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Conditional recommendations were made in favor of appendectomy over nonoperative treatment of appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over nonoperative treatment of biliary disease and acute cholecystitis specifically. Based on expert opinion, the panel also suggested either operative or nonoperative treatment of biliary diseases other than acute cholecystitis in the third trimester, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography rather than common bile duct exploration for symptomatic choledocholithiasis, applying the same criteria for emergent surgical intervention in pregnant and non-pregnant IBD patients, utilizing an open rather than minimally invasive approach for pregnant patients requiring emergent surgical treatment of IBD, and managing pregnant patients with active IBD flares in a multidisciplinary fashion at centers with IBD expertise.

Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy and the effects on maternal and fetal outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Non-obstetric surgery is fairly common in pregnant women. We performed a systematic review to update data on non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy on pregnancy, fetal and maternal outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE and Scopus was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search span was from January 2000 to November 2022. Thirty-six studies matched the inclusion criteria, and 24 publications were identified through reference mining; 60 studies were included in this review. Outcome measures were miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm birth, low birth weight, low Apgar score, and infant and maternal morbidity and mortality rates.

RESULTS

We obtained data for 80,205 women who underwent non-obstetric surgery and data for 16,655,486 women who did not undergo surgery during pregnancy. Prevalence of non-obstetric surgery was between 0.23% and 0.74% (median 0.37%). Appendectomy was the most common procedure with median prevalence of 0.10%. Near half (43%) of the procedures were performed during the second trimester, 32% during the first trimester, and 25% during the third trimester. Half of surgeries were scheduled, and half were emergent. Laparoscopic and open techniques were used equally for abdominal cavity. Women who underwent non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy had increased rate of stillbirth (odds ratio (OR) 2.0) and preterm birth (OR 2.1) compared to women without surgery. Surgery during pregnancy did not increase rate of miscarriage (OR 1.1), low 5 min Apgar scores (OR 1.1), the fetus being small for gestational age (OR 1.1) or congenital anomalies (OR 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of non-obstetric surgery has decreased during last decades, but still two out of 1000 pregnant women have scheduled surgery during pregnancy. Surgery during pregnancy increases the risk of stillbirth, and preterm birth. For abdominal cavity surgery, both laparoscopic and open approaches are feasible.

Adverse Fetal Outcomes and Maternal Mortality Following Nonobstetric Abdominopelvic Surgery in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the absolute risks of adverse fetal outcomes and maternal mortality following nonobstetric abdominopelvic surgery in pregnancy.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Surgery is often necessary in pregnancy, but absolute measures of risk required to guide perioperative management are lacking.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EvidenceBased Medicine Reviews from January 1, 2000, to December 9, 2020, for observational studies and randomized trials of pregnant patients undergoing nonobstetric abdominopelvic surgery. We determined the pooled proportions of fetal loss, preterm birth, and maternal mortality using a generalized linear random/mixed effects model with a logit link.

RESULTS

We identified 114 observational studies (52 [46%] appendectomy, 34 [30%] adnexal, 8 [7%] cholecystectomy, 20 [17%] mixed types) reporting on 67,111 pregnant patients. Overall pooled proportions of fetal loss, preterm birth, and maternal mortality were 2.8% (95% CI 2.2-3.6), 9.7% (95% CI 8.3-11.4), and 0.04% (95% CI 0.02-0.09; 4/10,000), respectively. Rates of fetal loss and preterm birth were higher for pelvic inflammatory conditions (eg, appendectomy, adnexal torsion) than for abdominal or nonurgent conditions (eg, cholecystectomy, adnexal mass). Surgery in the second and third trimesters was associated with lower rates of fetal loss (0.1%) and higher rates of preterm birth (13.5%) than surgery in the first and second trimesters (fetal loss 2.9%, preterm birth 5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Absolute risks of adverse fetal outcomes after nonobstetric abdom- inopelvic surgery vary with gestational age, indication, and acuity. Pooled estimates derived here identify high-risk clinical scenarios, and can inform implementation of mitigation strategies and improve preoperative counselling.

[Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pregnancy]

The review is devoted to the role of laparoscopic appendectomy in surgical management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. We analyzed reviews, prospective and retrospective studies in the PubMed, Google, the Springer Link online library, the Cochrane Systematic Review databases. The results of laparoscopic and traditional treatment of acute appendicitis in pregnant women were assessed. We analyzed clinical, epidemiological features in these patients, differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women, indications and contraindications for endoscopic treatment, features of laparoscopic procedures. Comparative assessment of laparoscopic and open surgeries for acute appendicitis in pregnant women was carried out. We also estimated the influence of surgical treatment of acute appendicitis on subsequent course of pregnancy.

EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on appendicitis in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice recommendations for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-informed, trustworthy guideline on the management of appendicitis in pregnancy. We aimed to address the questions of conservative or surgical management, and laparoscopic or open surgery for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence appraisal using the GRADE methodology. A European, multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, obstetricians/gynecologists, a midwife, and 3 patient representatives reached consensus through an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to formulate the recommendations. The project was developed in an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp).

RESULTS

Research evidence was of very low certainty. We recommend operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with complicated appendicitis or appendicolith on imaging studies (strong recommendation). We suggest operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with uncomplicated appendicitis and no appendicolith on imaging studies (weak recommendation). We suggest laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis until the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is below the level of the umbilicus; and laparoscopic or open appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis beyond the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is above the level of the umbilicus, depending on the preference and expertise of the surgeon.

CONCLUSION

Through a structured, evidence-informed approach, an interdisciplinary panel provides a strong recommendation to perform appendectomy for complicated appendicitis or appendicolith, and laparoscopic or open appendectomy beyond the 20th week, based on the surgeon's preference and expertise.

GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER

IPGRP-2022CN210.

Association of treatments for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes in the United States from 2000 to 2016: Results from a multi-level analysis

Background

Open appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, and non-surgical treatment are three options to treat acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Previous studies on the association of different treatment methods for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes have been limited by small sample sizes and residual confounding, especially with respect to hospital-level factors. This study aimed to investigate the association of treatment method for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes using a multi-level analysis.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted based on a large electronic health records database in the United States during the period 2000 to 2016. All pregnancies diagnosed with acute appendicitis and treated in participating hospitals during the study period were included. We conducted multi-level hierarchical logistic regression to analyze both individual- and hospital-level factors for abortion, preterm labor, and cesarean section.

Results

A total of 10,271 acute appendicitis during pregnancy were identified during the study period. Of them, 5,872 (57.2%) were treated by laparoscopic appendectomy, 1,403 (13.7%) by open appendectomy, and 2,996 (29.2%) by non-surgical treatment. Compared with open appendectomy, both laparoscopic appendectomy (adjusted OR, 0.6, 95% CI, 0.4, 0.9) and non-surgical treatment (adjusted OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3–0.7) showed a decreased risk of preterm labor. Other important individual-level determinants of adverse pregnancy outcomes included maternal age, gestational hypertension, and anemia during pregnancy, the hospital-level determinant included the number of beds.

Conclusions

Compared with open appendectomy, both laparoscopic appendectomy and non-surgical treatment may be associated with a lower risk of preterm labor, without increased risks of abortion and cesarean section.

Updated Evaluation of Laparoscopic vs. Open Appendicectomy During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To explore the updated evaluation about the obstetrical and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) for pregnancy appendicitis compared with open appendicectomy (OA). Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to screen eligible studies up to December 2020. Only clinical researches, no < 10 cases for LA and OA group were included. Twenty retrospective studies with 7,248 pregnant women, evaluating LA and OA in surgical and obstetrical outcomes, were included. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI and odds ratio (OR) was used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables. It seems LA was connected with significantly shorter hospital time and lower wound infection [mean difference (MD), −0.57 days; 95% CI, −0.96 to −0.18; p = 0.004 and OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.62; p = 0.0005, respectively]. The incidence of fetal loss after LA was higher than OA (OR,1.93; 95% CI, 1.39–2.69; p < 0.0001). It was almost similar in the rate of preterm delivery (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.34; p = 0.40) and other perioperative and obstetrical complications (p > 0.05). Our results indicated that the occurrence of fetal loss after LA should not be ignored. Caution, skillful operation, and thoroughly informed consent about the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy are necessary.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021233150.

Laparoscopic treatment for appendicitis during pregnancy: Retrospective cohort study

Background

Acute appendicitis is the most frequent non-obstetric surgical emergency during pregnancy. The benefits of laparoscopy during pregnancy are well known, but complications can occur, and these can affect both the mother and/or the foetus.We present results of laparoscopic surgical treatment of acute appendicitis in pregnant women, analysing the occurrence of adverse postoperative, obstetric and foetal outcomes and reviewing literature.

Materials and methods

Retrospective observational study on pregnant women with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Results

n = 63, mean age 28.4 years, average gestational age of 17.7 weeks (3-30 weeks). 6.4 % exploratory laparoscopies, 92 % laparoscopic appendectomies and one right colectomy were performed. Conversion rate was 3.2 %. When symptoms begun within 48 hours prior to surgery, a perforated appendicitis was found in 11 %; whereas when the time from symptom onset to surgery was greater than or equal to 48 hours, it was evident in 31 % of the cases (p 0.008). The only independent variable associated with the presence of postoperative complications was symptom duration prior to surgery greater than or equal to 48 hours (OR 4.8; 95 % CI 1.1-16.2; p 0.04). Seven minor and 2 mayor postoperative complications were observed. Patients with complications spent, on average, twice as many days hospitalized (p < 0.001); and had 8 times more risk of preterm delivery (p 0.03). Obstetric complications were more frequent in pregnant women operated during the first trimester. Foetal mortality was 1.6 %.

Conclusion

Surgical morbidity of acute appendicitis in pregnant women is linked to the delay in the diagnosis and treatment of the inflammatory condition. Laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy is not exempt from postoperative, obstetric and foetal complications. It is necessary to standardize the definitions of "complication" in order to collate reliably the outcomes presented in the literature.

Ectopic decidua of the appendix: a case report

Background

Ectopic decidua is the presence of decidual tissue outside the uterus. Ectopic decidua of the appendix is a rare entity that can present with abdominal symptoms mimicking appendicitis. We report a case of a 39-year-old female patient at 27 weeks gestational age with a 2-day history of right lower quadrant abdominal pain.

Case presentation

The patient was referred to our hospital with suspicion of either acute appendicitis or threatened rupture of the uterus, the latter of which was considered unlikely following close examination. Therefore, she underwent emergency appendectomy via laparotomy. Microscopic examination revealed decidual tissue with myxoid degeneration in the subserosal layer of the tip side of the appendix, without endometriosis, which was compatible with ectopic decidua (deciduosis).

Conclusions

Because it is extremely difficult to distinguish ectopic decidua of the appendix from acute appendicitis, even with various imaging modalities, we should be aware that ectopic decidua of the appendix is a differential diagnosis for acute appendicitis in pregnant women.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy for Appendicitis in Pregnancy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The clinical safety, efficacy and feasibility of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) compared with open appendectomy (OA) in pregnancy are still controversial. Herein, we are aiming to compare the clinical outcomes of LA and OA in patients with acute appendicitis during their pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and OA in pregnancy identifying using PubMed, Web of science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Ovid and Scopus. Two independent reviewers extracted data on surgical complication, fetal loss, preterm delivery, hospital stay, Apgar score in both groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies with total of 6497 patients (4464 in open and 2031 in laparoscopic group) were included. LA was associated with lower rate of wound infection [odds risk (OR)=3.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.77-5.56, P<0.0001] overall complications (OR=2.15, 95% CI: 1.47-3.14, P<0.0001) and shorter hospitalization (mean difference=0.72, 95% CI: 0.43-1.02, P<0.00001) compared with open group. LA was in a lower risk for 5-minute Apgar score (mean difference=0.09, 95% CI: 0.02-0.17, P=0.01) group than open group. No difference was found regarding preterm delivery between 2 groups. LA was associated with higher fetal loss (OR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.79, P=0.0007) compared with open surgery. However, laparoscopy was not associated with increased fetal loss after 2010 (OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.44-1.24, P=0.26) compared with open group.

CONCLUSIONS

LA in pregnancy seems to be feasible with acceptable outcome, especially in patients with early and mid-trimester period, with sophisticated hands and experienced centers.

The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnancy

Objective: Clinically suspected appendicitis is the most common nonobstetric surgical problem encountered in pregnancy. The diagnosis of appendicitis is hampered by equivocal symptoms during pregnancy. Ultrasonography (US) remains, as a rule, the imaging test of choice for the diagnosis of clinically suspected appendicitis during pregnancy and other imaging tools such as computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are usually avoided. We evaluated the accuracy of US in the diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy.Methods: The clinical and sonographic findings of all pregnant women (n = 90), who underwent appendectomy between January 2005 and December 2017 at our institution, were retrospectively reviewed, analyzed, and compared to the clinical and sonographic findings similarly obtained for a control group of nonpregnant women matched for age and date of surgery (±6 months). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ultrasonic findings were calculated and compared between groups as well as within the three pregnancy trimesters.Results: The mean age of the patients was 31.3 ± 0.4. Right lower quadrant pain was present in almost all patients (99%). The sole imaging modality used in our study cohort was US. Among nonpregnant controls, CT scan was primarily used on more occasions (53.3%) compared to US (45.6%). Nonpregnant women underwent significantly more laparoscopies compared to pregnant women (83.3 versus 45.6%, p < .001). The rate of negative appendectomy was higher in pregnant women (31.1 versus 10%, p = .002). Among pregnant women operated there was a higher rate of inconclusive or negative imaging (43.3 versus 11.1%, p < .001). The rate of perforated appendix at surgery was similar in both groups (6.7 and 4.4%, respectively, p = .75).Conclusions: Ultrasonography (US) is of mediocre accuracy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients beyond the first trimester of pregnancy. Thirty percent of pregnant women with suspected appendicitis are futilely operated. Given the low yield of US, a second-line imaging should be considered in cases of inconclusive US before surgery.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and feasible in pregnant women during second trimester: A retrospective study in a top-level Chinese center

Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common nonobstetric surgical emergency during pregnancy. According to the current guidelines and meta-analyses, traditional open appendectomy (OA) is still recommended for pregnant patients over laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), which might be associated with higher rates of fetal loss. Previous studies and experiences indicated that LA might be safe in the second trimester of pregnancy. The current study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LA in pregnant women during the second trimester.At our institution, a retrospective study was conducted with pregnant patients who underwent LA or OA during the second trimester between January 2016 and August 2018.A total of 48 patients were enrolled. Of them, 12 were managed with laparoscopy and 36 with the open approach. We found that the LA group had higher BMIs than the OA group (4.0 ± 4.3 vs 21.5 ± 2.9, P = .031). The financial results showed that the average daily medical costs for patients who underwent LA was higher than those who underwent OA (444 ± 107 US$ vs 340 ± 115 US$, P = .009), while the total cost of hospitalization was comparable between the 2 approaches. The perioperative and obstetric outcomes were comparable between LA and OA. In each group, only 1 patient had fetal loss. No "Yinao" was found in any of the patients in the LA group.In this study, with the proven advantages of the laparoscopic techniques, LA was found to be safe and feasible for pregnant women during the second trimester.

Reduced-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pregnancy

Current guidelines indicate that laparoscopic appendectomies are safe for pregnant patients with acute appendicitis. Recently, single- and reduced-port laparoscopic surgeries have gained popularity for nonpregnant patients, because they minimize abdominal wall trauma. Here, we describe a reduced-port laparoscopic appendectomy (RPLA) in a 31-year-old pregnant female performed at 27 weeks gestational age. Preoperative abdominal ultrasonography and computed tomography imaging showed an inflamed, swollen appendix and blood test results showed elevations in the white blood cell count and the C-reactive protein level. Accordingly, acute appendicitis was diagnosed. A surgical incision was performed at the umbilicus with an EZ-access device; an additional 5-mm trocar was placed at the right lower quadrant. Recovery was uneventful. The patient was discharged 8 days postoperatively. A vaginal delivery was achieved at term. The RPLA was a good surgical option for minimizing surgical invasiveness, without increasing the technical difficulty, in conditions where the uterus and fetus are growing.

Appendectomy in Third Trimester of Pregnancy and Birth Outcomes: A Propensity Score Analysis of a 6-Year Cohort Study Using Administrative Claims Data

INTRODUCTION

While there is evidence of obstetric and neonatal outcomes from non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy, surgery during the third trimester of gestation has not been evaluated as a prognostic factor for those outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether appendectomies during the third trimester are associated with adverse neonatal outcomes, in comparison with appendectomies during the first two trimesters, based on national administrative data in Colombia.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using administrative health records. It included all women who had live births and who underwent an appendectomy during any stage of pregnancy, between the years 2011 and 2016, and who belonged to Colombia's contributory health system. The main outcome was preterm birth. Birth weight and 1-min and 5-min Apgar scores were also measured, as well as outcomes used to identify neonatal near-miss cases. Propensity score matching was used in order to balance baseline characteristics (age, weeks of gestation, obstetric comorbidity index, and region and year the procedure was performed). Relative risks were estimated with Poisson regressions.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 2507 women in Colombia's contributory health system who underwent an appendectomy during pregnancy. Appendectomy was performed on 885 women (35.30%) in their first trimester, 1205 women (48.07%) in their second trimester, and 417 women (16.63%) in their third trimester. For the entire population, the preterm birth rate was 11.85 per 100 appendectomies. With the matched sample, this study found that women in their third trimester had a 1.65 greater risk of preterm birth [95% CI, 1.118-2.423], a 3.43 greater risk of birth at gestational ages < 33 weeks [95% CI, 1.363 to 8.625], 2.083 greater risk of weight under 1750 g [95% CI, 1.056-4.109], and a mean difference of - 0.247 [95% CI, - .382 to - .112] in the 1-min Apgar score and - .168^a [95% CI, - .276 to - .060] in the 5-min Apgar. No differences were found in birth weight or Apgar scores < 7.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia's contributory health system, women who undergo appendectomies in their third trimester have a greater risk of preterm birth, birth weight under 1750 g, birth at gestational ages less than 33 weeks, and decreased 1-min and 5-min Apgar scores.

[Acute appendicitis during pregnancy]

Acute appendicitis is the most frequent surgical disease complicating pregnancy. Accurate diagnosis is difficult due to atypical and misleading clinical manifestations. Surgeons frequently do not know about advantages and disadvantages of different diagnostic methods applied during pregnancy. Treatment of acute appendicitis in pregnant women remains the real challenge for surgeons. There are enough researches indicating on benefits and risks of both open and laparoscopic operations. The main risk is due to fetal loss after laparoscopic procedure. Safety of diagnostic techniques and laparoscopic procedures, surgical tactics and independent risk factors of pregnancy loss are touched in the article.

Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) have been widely performed instead of open appendectomies (OAs) during pregnancy. However, concerns about the safety of LA during pregnancy remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence relating to the safety of LA versus OA for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify articles describing LA versus OA in pregnancy, without restrictions regarding the publication date. The primary endpoints were fetal loss and preterm delivery.

RESULTS

After screening 801 studies, 22 comparative cohort studies were included in the analysis, which involved 4694 women, of whom 905 underwent LAs and 3789 underwent OAs. Fetal loss was significantly higher among those who underwent LAs compared with those who underwent OAs, and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 1.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-2.42) without heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis showed that the effect size was influenced by one of the studies, because its removal resulted in there being no significant difference between LA and OA with respect to the risk of fetal loss (OR 1.163, 95% CI: 0.68-1.99; P = 0.581). A significant difference was not evident between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.51-1.15), a result that did not change following the sensitivity analysis. The patients who underwent LA had shorter hospital stays (mean difference - 1.01, 95% CI: -1.61--0.41) and a lower wound infection risk (OR 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.76) compared with those who underwent OA.

CONCLUSION

It is not reasonable to conclude that LA in pregnant women might be associated with a greater risk of fetal loss. The difference between LA and OA with respect to preterm delivery was not significant.

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.

Safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric surgical presentation during pregnancy. There were concerns that laparoscopic appendicectomy increases the risk of foetal loss compared to an open approach. Therefore, with recent advances in perioperative care, it is likely the risk has changed. Here, we performed an updated meta-analysis assessing the safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnant women.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was undertaken between 2000 and 2017 on Ovid Medline and Embase. The primary outcome measures were foetal loss and preterm delivery, whereas secondary outcome measures were operative time and hospital length of stay. A random-effect model was performed to pool odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

Seventeen observational studies were included, with 1886 patients in the laparoscopic and 4261 patients in the open group. Comparing laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy, there were 54 (5.96%) and 136 (3.73%) foetal losses, respectively. However, preterm delivery was much higher in the open approach (8.99%) compared to laparoscopic approach (2.84%). Pooled OR for foetal loss was 1.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-2.58, P < 0.001), whereas OR for preterm delivery was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27-0.55, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both approaches for operative time (SMD -0.07; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.30, P = 0.71) or hospital length of stay (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.83 to 0.16, P = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

In a pooled analysis of level III evidence, laparoscopic appendicectomy posed a higher risk of foetal loss but lower risk of preterm delivery. Caution and informed consent are crucial when offering a laparoscopic approach.

Safety of Laparoscopic Surgery for Benign Diseases during Pregnancy: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare fetal, maternal, and operative outcomes of laparoscopic surgery versus laparotomy for major benign diseases including appendicitis, cholecystitis, adnexal masses, and uterine myoma during pregnancy.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

The Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a national inpatient database for acute care inpatients in Japan.

PATIENTS

Eligible patients (n = 6018) underwent abdominal surgery (4047 laparotomy and 1971 laparoscopy patients) from July 2010 through March 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

The 2 groups were compared using propensity score matching analysis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was fetal adverse events, including abortion or stillbirth within 7 days after surgery and premature delivery during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were operative time, blood transfusion, and length of hospital stay after surgery. Propensity score matching created 740 pairs. Significant difference was observed in the primary outcome between propensity score-matched patients in the laparotomy versus laparoscopy group (1.8% vs .41%, respectively; risk difference, -1.4%; 95% confidence interval, -2.4 to -.30; p = .01). Compared with the laparotomy group, the laparoscopy group had a significantly lower incidence of blood transfusion (2.3% vs .41%, p = .002), shorter operative time (115 vs 95 minutes, p <.001), and shorter hospital stay (9.2 vs 5.9 days, p <.001).

CONCLUSION

Our current study using propensity score matching suggests the advantages of laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases compared with laparotomy because laparoscopic surgery had advantages in short-term fetal adverse events, incidence of blood transfusion, operative time, and hospital stay.

Outcomes after open and laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Acute appendicitis is the most prevalent cause of non-obstetrical surgical disease during pregnancy. There is no consensus on the optimal surgical management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Our aim is to identify surgical and obstetrical outcomes of laparoscopic (LA) and open approach (OA) in pregnant patients with acute appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for articles published up to May 2017, along with the references of all articles. Prospective and retrospective trials reporting outcomes among pregnant women undergoing laparoscopic and open appendectomy were included. Of the 493 records screened, 20 were eligible for meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Statistical meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6210 pregnant women from twenty studies were included in meta-analysis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with significantly lower overall complication rates and shorter hospital stays (1835 patients OR 0.48 95% CI 0.29, 0.80 p = 0.005). While the open appendectomy group showed prolongation of gestational age for term deliveries, laparoscopic appendectomy patients had higher rates of fetal loss (543 patients MD -0.46 weeks 95% CI-0.87 to -0.04, p = 0.03 and 4867 patients OR 1.82 95% CI 1.30 to 2.57, p = 0.0006, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature remains inconclusive on the optimal approach of appendectomy in pregnant women. Further larger-volume studies are needed in order to elucidate the critical effect of laparoscopic appendectomy on fetal loss rates.

Could laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnant women affect obstetric outcomes? A multicenter study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative and obstetric outcomes of pregnant women between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery and to evaluate the predictive factors for overall obstetric outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of pregnant women who underwent appendectomy between January 2008 and June 2015 at six hospitals affiliated to Hallym University.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were evaluated. Twenty-four underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and 56 underwent open appendectomy (OA). There were no significant differences in the patients' characteristics and gestational age at surgery between the two groups. Operation time, time to flatus, and time to soft food intake were similar in both groups. The length of stay was shorter in the LA group than in the OA group (5.1 vs 8.1 days, P = 0.044). Gestational age at delivery, birth weight, and delivery type were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in overall obstetric poor outcome (20.8 vs 14.3 %, P = 0.516), including preterm delivery (8.3 vs 7.1 %, P = 1.000) and fetal loss (12.5 vs 7.1 %, P = 0.350). Multivariable analysis revealed that fever >38 °C (P = 0.022) and maternal age (P = 0.044) were independent predictors for the overall poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

LA was associated with shorter length of stay compared with OA, but perioperative and obstetric outcomes were similar with both procedures. LA can be safely performed in pregnant women in any trimester.

Update on the management of non-obstetric acute abdomen in pregnant patients

Acute abdomen is a rare entity in the pregnant patient, with an incidence of one in 500-635 patients. Its appearance requires a quick response and an early diagnosis to treat the underlying disease and prevent maternal and fetal morbidity. Imaging tests are essential, due to clinical and laboratory masking in this subgroup. Appendicitis and complicated biliary pathology are the most frequent causes of non-obstetric acute abdomen in the pregnant patient. The decision to operate, the timing, and the surgical approach are essential for a correct management of this pathology. The aim of this paper is to perform a review and update on the diagnosis and treatment of non-obstetric acute abdomen in pregnancy.

Acute appendicitis in pregnancy: literature review

INTRODUCTION

suspected appendicitis is the most common indication for surgery in non-obstetric conditions during pregnancy and occurs in about one in 500 to one in 635 pregnancies per year. This occurs more often in the second trimester of pregnancy. Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical problem encountered during pregnancy.

METHODS

a literature review on research of scientific articles, under the terms "acute appendicitis" and "pregnancy", in PubMed, Lilacs/SciELO, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Uptodate databases.

RESULTS

the clinical manifestations of appendicitis are similar to non-pregnant women, however, without a classic presentation, which often occurs, diagnosis is difficult and must be supported by imaging.

DISCUSSION

clinical diagnosis should be strongly suspected in pregnant women with classic findings such as abdominal pain that migrates to the right lower quadrant. The main purpose of imaging is to reduce delays in surgical intervention due to diagnostic uncertainty. A secondary objective is to reduce, but not eliminate, the negative appendectomy rate. Differential diagnosis of suspected acute appendicitis usually includes pathologies considered in non-pregnant people.

CONCLUSION

the imaging study of choice is ultrasound, MRI may be used when the former is not conclusive and, as a last resort, a CT scan can be performed. The treatment remains appendectomy by laparotomy, since the feasibility of video- assisted surgery in these cases remains controversial.

Laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy versus open: a study in 1999 pregnant patients

BACKGROUND

When pregnant patients require surgery, whether to perform an operation open or laparoscopic is often debated. We evaluated the impact of laparoscopy for common general surgical problems in pregnancy to determine safety and trends in operative approach over time.

METHODS

Pregnant patients undergoing appendectomy or cholecystectomy were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. We analyzed demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes. Univariate comparison and multivariate regression analysis (MVA) were performed adjusting for confounding factors: age, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, and smoking, and an additional MVA was performed for perforated cases.

RESULTS

A total of 1999 pregnant patients between 2005 and 2012 were evaluated. Of 1335 appendectomies, 894 were performed laparoscopically (LA) and 441 open (OA). For 664 cholecystectomies, 606 were laparoscopic (LC) and 58 open (OC). There were no deaths. For LA versus OA, patient characteristics were not different {age: 27.7 vs. 28.2 years, p = 0.19; diabetes: 1.8 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.24; smoking: 19 vs. 16.1%, p = 0.2} except for BMI (27.9 vs. 28.4 kg/m(2); p = 0.03). LA had shorter operative times (ORT), length of stay (LOS), and fewer postoperative complications compared to OA. In MVA, difference between approaches remained statistically significant for ORT (<0.0001), LOS (<0.01), and wound complications (<0.01). MVA was performed for perforated cases alone: LA had equal ORT (p = 0.19) yet shorter LOS (p = <0.001). The majority of LA were performed in the last 4 years versus the first 4 years (61 vs. 39%, p < 0.001). For LC versus OC, patient characteristics were not different: age (28.3 vs. 28.7 years; p = 0.33), BMI (31.4 vs. 33.2 kg/m(2), p = 0.25), diabetes (2.8 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.68), and smoking (21.1 vs. 25.9%, p = 0.4). LC had a shorter ORT, LOS, and fewer postoperative complications than OC. In MVA, the difference between approaches remained statistically significant for ORT (<0.0001), LOS (<0.0001), and minor complications (<0.01). In MVA for cholecystitis with perforation, no difference was seen for LOS, ORT, or postoperative complications (p > 0.05). The percentage of LC cases appeared to increase over time (89 vs. 93%, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

While fetal events are unknown, LA and LC in pregnant patients demonstrated shorter ORT, LOS, and reduced complications and were performed more frequently over time. Even in perforated cases, laparoscopy appears safe in pregnant patients.

Abdominal surgery in pregnancy--an interdisciplinary challenge

BACKGROUND

Abdominal operations are performed during ca. 2% of all pregnancies. They represent an unusual situation not only for the patient, but also for the involved surgeons and anesthesiologists. Appendectomy, followed by cholecystectomy are the two most common types of operation performed during pregnancy. Special questions arise with regard to the peri- and intraoperative management and the optimal surgical approach.

METHOD

This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed database.

RESULTS

The question of laparoscopy versus laparotomy during pregnancy has been addressed to date only in case series and a few meta-analyses. Two meta-analyses have shown a significantly higher rate of miscarriage after laparoscopic, compared to open, appendectomy (relative risk [RR] 1.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-2.77). The risk of preterm birth is also somewhat higher after laparoscopic appendectomy according to one meta-analysis on this subject (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.78-1.76), but significantly lower according to another meta-analysis (2.1% vs. 8.1%, p<0.0001). For cholecystectomy, laparoscopy was associated with a lower miscarriage rate than laparotomy (1 in 89 cases, versus 2 in 69 cases), but with a somewhat higher preterm birth rate (6 in 89 cases, versus 2 in 69 cases). Delay or non-performance of surgery in a patient with appendicitis or cholecystitis can lead to additional hospitalizations, a higher miscarriage rate, premature rupture of the membranes, and preterm birth.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy in experienced hands is safe even during pregnancy, with the recognized advantages of minimally invasive surgery, yet it carries a higher miscarriage rate than laparotomy, with a comparable preterm birth rate. Before surgery, patients should be thoroughly informed about the operation they are about to undergo and the advantages and disadvantages of the available surgical approaches.

Meckel's Diverticulitis as a Cause of an Acute Abdomen in the Second Trimester of Pregnancy: Laparoscopic Management

Introduction. Meckel's diverticulitis is an extremely rare cause of an acute abdomen in pregnancy. Its clinical presentation tends to be rather unusual and therefore commonly delaying diagnosis. The surgical method of exploration can be either by laparoscopy or through an open incision. Case Report. We report a case of a 34-year-old, P1 with previous Caesarean section, who presented at 20 weeks with worsening right-sided abdominal pain, distention, and peritonism. Ultrasound scan showed an area of a possibly thickened loop of bowel inconsistent with an appendicitis. The findings at laparoscopy were purulent fluid in the pelvis, a congested appendix, and inflamed Meckel's diverticulum. An appendectomy and excision of the diverticulum was performed using stapler technique. Discussion. Meckel's diverticulitis in pregnancy can have nonspecific presentation and poses difficulties for preoperative diagnosis. Delay in diagnosis and management poses significant maternal and fetal risks. The use of laparoscopy if the gestational age and uterine size permit its use allows a thorough exploration of the abdominal cavity and management of rarer and unexpected pathology. Laparoscopic management of acute abdomen in the midtrimester of pregnancy has been found to be safe and effective.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnancy: a systematic review of the published evidence

Surgical intervention for acute appendicitis during pregnancy carries significant risk to both mother and foetus. The safety of Laparoscopic Appendicectomy in pregnancy has been a matter of debate among clinicians. We have critically reviewed the available published evidence in regards with this debate.

CONCLUSION

There is no strong current evidence as to the preferred modality of appendicectomy; open or laparoscopic, during pregnancy from the prospect of foetal or maternal safety. However, low grade evidence shows that laparoscopic appendicectomy during pregnancy might be associated with higher rates of foetal loss.

Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy in pregnancy: a population-based analysis of maternal outcome

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the standard treatment of acute appendicitis for the general population; however, there is still some doubt regarding its safety for pregnant patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate and compare the maternal outcome of pregnant patients with acute appendicitis following either an open appendectomy (OA) or LA from a population-based database.

METHODS

This study is based on the National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients with both ICD-9-CM codes for appendicitis (540.9, 540.0, and 540.1) and pregnancy (V22) in the same admission were considered to have acute appendicitis during pregnancy. These patients were divided into three groups according to the type of treatment: LA, OA, and non-operative treatment. Outcome measures that were compared between the groups included maternal complications such as preterm labor, abortion, and the need of cesarean section. Besides, the differences of medical expenditure and length of hospital stay between the groups were also analyzed.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2010, a total of 859 pregnant women who had acute appendicitis were identified. They had increased risks for preterm labor, abortion, and increased requirement of cesarean section compared to the control group (i.e., those without acute appendicitis). Among the three groups, the non-operated group has the highest risk of preterm labor. Patients who underwent LA did not have any increased risk of maternal complications compared to the OA group. Furthermore, LA patients had shorter hospital stay than OA.

CONCLUSION

Compared to non-operative treatment, appendectomy is the preferred treatment for pregnant patients who have acute appendicitis. LA can be performed safely in pregnant patients without bringing additional maternal complications compared to OA.

Clinical outcomes compared between laparoscopic and open appendectomy in pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Despite the initial absolute or relative contraindication of laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy, in the last decade, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been performed in pregnant women. But few studies compare the outcomes of LA compared with open appendectomy (OA). We investigated clinical outcomes to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LA compared with OA in pregnant women.

METHODS

We recruited consecutive pregnant patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis who were undergoing LA or OA between May 2007 and August 2011 into the study.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients (22 LA and 39 OA) enrolled in our study. There were no significant differences in duration of surgery, postoperative complication rate and obstetric and fetal outcomes, including incidence of preterm labour, delivery type, gestation age at delivery, birth weight and APGAR scores between the 2 groups. However, the LA group had shorter time to first flatus (2.4 ± 0.4 d v. 4.0 ± 1.7 d, p = 0.034), earlier time to oral intake (2.3 ± 1.6 d v. 4.1 ± 1.9 d, p = 0.023) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (4.2 ± 2.9 d v. 6.9 ± 3.7 d, p = 0.043) than the OA group.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy is a clinically safe and effective procedure in all trimesters of pregnancy and should be considered as a standard treatment alternative to OA. Further evaluation including prospective randomized clinical trials comparing LA with OA are needed to confirm our results.

Appendectomy during pregnancy--is pregnancy outcome depending by operation technique?

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and pregnancy outcome between women undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy and those undergoing open appendectomy during pregnancy for presumed acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of all women undergoing appendectomy during pregnancy in a tertiary referral medical center from 2000 to 2009. Outcome was compared between those undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy and those undergoing open appendectomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 83,510 deliveries occurred during the study period, 85 (0.10%) were eligible for the study group. Of these, 26 (31%) had a laparoscopic appendectomy and 59 (69%) had an open appendectomy. No significant difference was found in the general, delivery and neonatal outcome characteristics between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the mean gestational age at surgery between laparoscopic appendectomy and the open appendectomy groups (14.6 versus 19.3 weeks respectively, p = 0.009). Post-operative complications (fever >38.0 °C or the presence of uterine contractions) rate was higher in the open appendectomy compared to the laparoscopic appendectomy group (25.5% versus 3.8%, respectively, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy appears to be a safe procedure for presumed acute appendicitis during pregnancy with less post-operative complications as compared to open appendectomy.

Appendicitis: changing perspectives

Neoplasms are an uncommon finding after appendectomy, with malignant tumors occurring in less than 1% of the surgical specimens, and carcinoid being the most frequent malignancy. A negative or inconclusive ultrasound is not adequate to rule out appendicitis and should be followed by CT scan. For pregnant patients, MRI is a reasonable alternative to CT scan. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics is safe as an initial treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis, with a significant decrease in complications but a high failure rate. Open and laparoscopic appendectomies for appendicitis provide similar results overall, although the laparoscopic technique may be advantageous for obese and elderly patients but may be associated with a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess. Preoperative diagnostic accuracy is of utmost importance during pregnancy because a negative appendectomy is associated with a significant incidence of fetal loss. The increased morbidity associated with appendectomy delay suggests that prompt surgical intervention remains the safest approach. Routine incidental appendectomy should not be performed except in selected cases. Interval appendectomy is not indicated because of considerable risks of complications and lack of any clinical benefit. Patients older than 40 years with an appendiceal mass or abscess treated nonoperatively should routinely have a colonoscopy as part of their follow-up to rule out cancer or alternative diagnosis.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of safety of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendicectomy has gained wide acceptance as an alternative to open appendicectomy during pregnancy. However, data regarding the safety and optimal surgical approach to appendicitis in pregnancy are still controversial.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and open appendicectomy in pregnancy identified using PubMed and Scopus search engines from January 1990 to July 2011. Two reviewers independently extracted data on fetal loss, preterm delivery, wound infection, duration of operation, hospital stay, Apgar score and birth weight between laparoscopic and open appendicectomy groups.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 3415 women (599 in laparoscopic and 2816 in open group) were included in the analysis. Fetal loss was statistically significantly worse in those who underwent laparoscopy compared with open appendicectomy; the pooled relative risk (RR) was 1·91 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·31 to 2·77) without heterogeneity. The pooled RR for preterm labour was 1·44 (0·68 to 3·06), but this risk was not statistically significant. The mean difference in length of hospital stay was - 0·49 (-1·76 to - 0·78) days, but this was not clinically significant. No significant difference was found for wound infection, birth weight, duration of operation or Apgar score.

CONCLUSION

The available low-grade evidence suggests that laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnant women might be associated with a greater risk of fetal loss.

APPENDICITIS IN PREGNANCY

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric indication for surgical intervention in pregnancy, complicating 1/500 to 1/2000 deliveries. Due to the anatomical and physiological changes associated with pregnancy, appendicitis may present a diagnostic dilemma, leading to management delays and thus increasing the risk of appendiceal perforation. Many of the common presenting symptoms of appendicitis are common features of normal pregnancy including lower abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and leukocytosis. Furthermore, the enlarging gravid uterus may displace the appendix to varying degrees thus altering the classic symptom pattern of appendicitis. The often nonspecific presentation in pregnancy may necessitate the utilization of diagnostic imaging to aid in accurate diagnosis. However, the perforated appendix is the most common surgical cause of fetal loss and the time required for any diagnostic aid must be weighed against the increasing risk of perforation caused by delay in surgical intervention.

Laparoscopic appendectomy: new concepts

Over the last three decades more surgeons have used laparoscopic appendectomy as their surgical approach of choice in the management of patients with appendicitis. This includes special groups of patients, namely, pediatric, pregnant, and obese patients. Laparoscopy has the benefit of lower morbidity, decreased rate of wound complications, faster recovery, shorter length of hospital stay, and faster return to work over open appendectomy.

Risks associated with laparoscopic entry: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians

The aim of these recommendations of the French National College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians was to focus the surgeon's attention on those aspects which could allow him/her to prevent, or at least limit, the incidence of these serious complications, in the absence of a previous laparotomy or specific risk factors (obesity, gauntness, large pelvic mass or pregnancy), four widely evaluated techniques can be used in a first line approach (Grade B): blind trans-umbilical technique following creation of pneumoperitoneum with a needle, open laparoscopy (Hasson technique), left upper quadrant entry (pneumoperitoneum and insertion of the first trocar) and direct trans-umbilical trocar with no prior pneumoperitoneum. The currently existing trials do not allow one or another of these techniques to be preferred. Radially expanding insertion systems and optical trocars cannot be recommended as a first-line approach, as a consequence of their currently insufficient degree of evaluation (Grade C). Trans-umbilical (blind or open) laparoscopic entry in a slim woman must be associated with care, as a result of the proximity of the large vessels (Grade B). If a blind trans-umbilical insertion technique is decided upon, one option can be to insufflate into the left upper quadrant (professional consensus). In the case of a previous midline laparotomy, whatever the technique used, initial entry is recommended at a distance from the scars (Grade B). It is recommended to carry out micro-laparoscopy in the LUQ, because this is the most completely evaluated technique for this indication (Grade C). One option is to use open laparoscopy at a distance from the existing scars (professional consensus). During pregnancy, the insertion position of the first laparoscopic trocar will need to be adapted according to the volume of the uterus (Grade B). Starting from 14WG, trans-umbilical Veress needle insufflation is contraindicated (Grade C). Two trocar insertion techniques are thus recommended: open laparoscopy (using the trans-umbilical or supra-umbilical routes, depending on the volume of the uterus) or micro-laparoscopy via the left upper quadrant (Grade C). After the second quarter of pregnancy, with laparoscopy the patient will need to be placed on a table inclined towards her left side, in order to minimize compression of the inferior vena cava (Grade B). In the case of laparoscopy during pregnancy, the insufflation pressure must be maintained at a maximum of 12mmHg (Grade B). After 24WG, if laparoscopy is performed, it is recommended to apply open laparoscopy, above the level of the umbilicus (professional consensus). Patients must be informed of the risks inherent to the insertion of trocars during laparoscopy (vascular, bowel or bladder injury) (Grade B). The more benign the pathology requiring an operation, the more detailed the supplied information must be, including that concerning rare but serious complications (Grade B).

[Surgical techniques of appendectomy for acute appendicitis]

Over the last 20 years, the treatment of acute appendicitis has been transformed by the development of the laparoscopic approach. And yet the net value of this approach continues to be debated. Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with a lower complication rate and a shorter period of disability in the general population. While operative costs are higher, the global cost of laparoscopic appendectomy is lower than for open appendectomy. There is a somewhat higher rate of abdominal abscess for the laparoscopic route. Laparoscopic appendectomy shows clear advantages in obese patients and in those with gangrenous or ruptured appendicitis. The laparoscopic approach is contra-indicated during pregnancy due to a higher incidence of miscarriage. Treatment of the appendiceal stump by ligature decreases the expense associated with the use of a surgical stapler. When Meckel's diverticulum is encountered during appendectomy, it should be removed in all pediatric patients; in adults, Meckel's diverticulectomy in adults should be performed only for clear-cut pathology. Surgeons continue to innovate and refine appendectomy techniques but many questions remain to be answered.