Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port approach for acute appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Risk factors and incidence of unplanned re-operation after transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic appendectomy in children

Purpose

This study aims to investigate the factors associated with unplanned re-operations (UR) following transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSILA) in pediatric patients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical data from children diagnosed with acute appendicitis (AA) who underwent TUSILA at our center between January 2020 and January 2024. All the operations were performed under single-port laparoscopy, including two methods of appendectomy, intra-TUSILA and extra-TUSILA. Patients were categorized into the UR and control groups to compare baseline characteristics, clinical data, postoperative management, and surgical outcomes.

Results

The study included 188 patients (110 males and 78 females), with 4 (2.1%) in the UR group. Within the UR group, three cases (75%) necessitated re-operation due to adhesive intestinal obstruction, while one case (25%) was due to an appendiceal remnant fistula. The baseline characteristics, operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, surgeon experience, and postoperative fasting times showed no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05). However, the incidences of procedures beyond standard TUSILA, lateral peritoneum lysis, appendiceal perforation, complicated appendicitis as confirmed by pathology, drainage tube placement, and the length of antibiotic duration were significantly higher in the UR group compared to the control group (all P < 0.05).

Conclusion

A notable percentage of pediatric patients undergoing TUSILA experience UR, primarily due to adhesive ileus, with a substantial proportion potentially linked to surgical technical errors and postoperative management.

Simultaneous Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Biopsy via a Single Skin Incision Using a Port-Sharing Procedure in Infantile Neuroblastoma: A Case Report

Neuroblastoma, typically presenting with atypical symptoms, rarely manifests as a urachal tumor. We report a case of urachal neuroblastoma wherein a single port site was used for both laparotomy and thoracoscopy. A 1-month-old female presented with umbilical discharge. Enhanced computed tomography revealed a urachal tumor, later confirmed pathologically as neuroblastoma without MYCN amplification. During chemotherapy for low-risk classification, a right adrenal mass and mediastinal lymphadenopathy emerged, prompting further biopsy. We employed a port-sharing procedure at the right hypochondrium to perform simultaneous laparoscopic and thoracoscopic biopsies, reducing the number of port-side wounds. This approach could be applicable in other cases requiring combined thoracic and abdominal surgical access.

Single-incision versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

While consensus on single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) for acute appendicitis is lacking, our meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of SILA compared to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA). A computer-based search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang, China Biological Medicine (CBM), PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SILA with CTLA groups. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. A total of 26 RCTs were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that, compared to the CTLA group, the SILA group had a longer operation time [MD = 7.97, 95 % CI (5.84, 10.10), P < 0.00001], and a higher rate of conversion to open surgery [RR = 2.60, 95 % CI (1.27, 5.31), P = 0.009], but had a shorter time to return to normal activities [MD = -0.76, 95 % CI (-1.15, -0.37), P = 0.0001]. Additionally, the SILA group had higher satisfaction scores [SMD = 1.21, 95 % CI (0.75, 1.68), P < 0.00001] and cosmetic scores [SMD = 0.68, 95 % CI (0.45, 0.90), P < 0.00001]. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pain scores at 24 h postoperatively [MD = -0.21, 95 % CI (-0.56, 0.14), P = 0.25], the incidence of wound infection [RR = 1.13, 95 % CI (0.74, 1.73), P = 0.58], or the overall complication rate [RR = 0.86, 95 % CI (0.66, 1.12), P = 0.27]. SILA is a safe and effective surgical approach that allows patients to recover to normal activities earlier, particularly for patients with a strong demand for better cosmetic outcomes. However, the quality of some RCTs in this meta-analysis is low, and further verification is needed through future high-quality RCTs.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-hole laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in children by senior pediatric surgeons: a multicenter study from China

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of single-incision laparoscopy appendectomy (SILA) and traditional three-hole laparoscopy appendectomy (THLA) for the treatment of acute appendicitis in children.

Methods

The clinical data of children (<14 years old) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College, Hubei Provincial Maternal Health Hospital and Qingdao Women and Children's Medical Center from January 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the operation method, the patients were assigned to the SILA group or the THLA group. The clinical data, including the efficacy, and the surgical details, including the complications, of the two surgical methods were compared. The personal information of the children and the time of disease onset were recorded.

Results

In this study, the data of 588 patients, including 385 patients in the THLA group and 203 patients in the SILA group were collected. The baseline characteristics between the two groups of patients before surgery were comparable. There was no significant difference in the average operation time between the THLA group and the SILA group (56.31 ± 1.83 min vs. 57.48 ± 1.15 min, P > 0.05). There was also no significant difference in the average length of hospital stay between the THLA group and the SILA group (6.91 ± 0.24 days vs. 7.16 ± 0.36 days, P > 0.05). However, the FLACC scores of the SILA group (3.71 ± 0.78) were significantly lower than those of the THLA group (3.99 ± 0.56) on the second postoperative day, and the difference was significant (P < 0.05). The score of the questionnaire evaluating cosmetic appearance of the postoperative abdomen was significantly higher in the SILA group (15.81 ± 0.36) than in the THLA group (13.10 ± 0.24) (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

SILA is more advantageous in terms of postoperative FLACC scores and cosmetic appearance in children than THLA. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications or other aspects between the two surgical methods.

A brief overview of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy as an optimal surgical procedure for patients with acute appendicitis: still a long way to go

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) has become a good alternative to the traditional surgical treatment of acute appendicitis, due to its advantages of small incision, mild postoperative pain, short hospital stay, and good cosmetic effect. However, the further application of SPLA has been restricted by its relatively long operating time, high level of operating difficulty, and increased equipment and technical requirements. Clinical teams worldwide have attempted to improve and optimize SPLA technical protocols and equipment to maintain stable intraoperative pneumoperitoneal pressure, improve the 'triangle relationship' of operating angles, and develop new surgical procedures with less trauma and higher cost-effectiveness. Here, new SPLA techniques reported over the past decade are reviewed and compared, with the aim of providing new insights into technical improvements, equipment upgrades and clinical studies in the coming years.

Evaluation of Drain Insertion After Appendicectomy for Complicated Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of drain insertion versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus was conducted, and all studies comparing drain versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis were included. Abdominal collection, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, faecal fistula, paralytic ileus, length of hospital stay (LOS) and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Seventeen studies reporting a total number of 4,255 patients who underwent appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis with (n=1,580) or without (n=2,657) drain were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding abdominal collection (odds ratio (OR)=1.41, P=0.13). No-drain group was superior to the drain group regarding SSI (OR=1.93, P=0.0001), faecal fistula (OR=4.76, P=0.03), intestinal obstruction (OR=2.40, P=0.04) and paralytic ileus (OR=2.07, P=0.01). There was a difference regarding mortality rate between the two groups (3.4% in the drain group vs 0.5% in the no-drain group, risk difference (RD)=0.01, 95% CI (-0.01, 0.04), P=0.36). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has shown that drains have no effect on the development of intra-abdominal collections in complicated appendicitis, but it can significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications such as fistula, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, ileus and length of hospital stay.

Conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy versus transumbilical and suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy using only conventional laparoscopic instruments

PURPOSE

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is usually performed using single-port instruments, which may restrict its development and application. This study explored the performance of transumbilical SILA (TSILA) and suprapubic SILA (SSILA) using only conventional laparoscopic instruments and compared them with conventional three-hole/port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 174 patients who underwent CLA, TSILA, or SSILA for acute appendicitis at our hospital between June 2019 and July 2021. Demographic data and clinical outcomes were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

Compared with CLA, TSILA was associated with significant reductions in postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, and hospital cost, while SSILA was associated with significant reductions in length of hospital stay and hospital cost (all P < 0.05). Significantly more patients in the two SILA groups were cosmetically satisfied than those in the CLA group (all P < 0.05). However, compared with CLA, SSILA required a significantly longer operative time (65.3 ± 24.1 vs 56.5 ± 20.9, P = 0.039). Besides, compared with TSILA, SSILA showed significantly higher postoperative pain score (2 ± 2 vs 3 ± 2, P = 0.006). Mild incisional or intraabdominal infections were noticed in 2 (3.0%) patients in the CLA group, 3 (5.1%) in the TSILA group, and 3 (6.3%) in the SSILA group (P = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

SILA performed with only conventional laparoscopic instruments was associated with reduced hospital stay and cost and higher cosmetic satisfaction in comparison to CLA. However, it is technically demanding and may increase operative time.

Intra-/Extracorporeal Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: There are two approaches to single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA): intracorporeal (Intra) and extracorporeal (Extra). However, the differences in the efficacy between these procedures remain unclear. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and usefulness of these techniques with those of conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in children. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, CENTRAL, and Scopus databases. Studies comparing outcomes of "Intra-SILA and CLA" or "Extra-SILA and CLA" in children aged <18 years were included. Operative time, hospitalization duration, wound infection, intra-abdominal infection, conversion to open, additional ports, and narcotic doses were evaluated. Results: Overall, 20 studies (six randomized controlled trials [RCTs], one prospective non-RCT, and 13 retrospective cohort studies) (Intra-SILA: 322, CLA: 791 cases; Extra-SILA: 1318, CLA: 1313 cases) were included. Compared with CLA, Extra-SILA was associated with a shorter operative time (mean difference, -9.79 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], -18.34 to -1.24) and lower incidence of intra-abdominal infection (3.3% versus 4.6%, odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82) and a higher rate of additional port (13.6% versus 0%, OR, 43.93; 95% CI, 14.79 to 130.50). Meanwhile, the outcomes of Intra-SILA were comparable with those of CLA. However, the participants in the Intra-SILA group received significantly lower doses of narcotics than those in the CLA group. Conclusion: Although the evidence was insufficient, both Intra- and Extra-SILA were comparable to CLA with respect to safety. Extra-SILA seems to have an advantage of a shorter operative time, but additional ports may be required.

Acute appendicitis-advances and controversies

Being one of the most common causes of the acute abdomen, acute appendicitis (AA) forms the bread and butter of any general surgeon's practice. With the recent advancements in AA's management, much controversy in diagnostic algorithms, possible differential diagnoses, and weighing the management options has been generated, with no absolute consensus in the literature. Since Alvarado described his eponymous clinical scoring system in 1986 to stratify AA risk, there has been a burgeoning of additional scores for guiding downstream management and mortality assessment. Furthermore, advancing literature on the role of antibiotics, variations in appendicectomy, and its adjuncts have expanded the surgeon's repertoire of management options. Owing to the varied presentation, diagnostic tools, and management of AA have also been proposed in special groups such as pregnant patients, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. This article seeks to raise the critical debates about what is currently known about the above aspects of AA and explore the latest controversies in the field. Considering the ever-evolving coronavirus disease 2019 situation worldwide, we also discuss the pandemic's repercussions on patients and how surgeons' practices have evolved in the context of AA.