Securing the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: evidence for routine stapling?

Risk-Benefit Comparison Between Endoloop and Endostapler Devices for the Closure of Appendiceal Stumps in Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Introduction Acute appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdomen and the most frequent surgical emergency in the world. Since the nineteenth century, surgical resolution has been the most accepted treatment worldwide, and laparoscopic appendectomy is currently preferred as the treatment of choice because it has several benefits. The closure of the appendiceal stump is the most crucial step during appendectomy since its inadequate management can cause post-surgical complications. Throughout recent years, several methods have been proposed to perform this closure. This study was performed to compare the post-surgical outcomes of the use of endoloop and endostapler devices. Methods This is a retrospective study of 290 patients aged 18 to 83 who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between 2016 and 2020. Demographic data, clinical history, tomographic findings, and laboratory data were collected, as well as appendicular base management technique, severity degree of appendicitis at hospital admission, postoperative complications at 30 days, hospital readmission, and in-hospital stay. Statistical tests and binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors, with a significance level of p<0.05. Results Demographic data and clinical history did not show statistically significant differences. The presence of a pre-surgical abscess with tomography was 1.58 times higher in the endostapler group. Post-surgical results showed that the use of endostapler devices represented a 2.7 times higher risk of post-surgical abscess. The endostapler group was also found to have 1.87 times the risk of post-surgical sepsis. Conclusion Our study shows that the use of an endoloop reduces the risk of postoperative abscess by 16.5% and protects against the development of post-surgical sepsis by 30%.

Effect of endoscopic loop ties in acute appendicitis on wound infection rate: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis study to measure the consequence of endoscopic loop ties (ELT) in acute appendicitis (AA) on wound infection rate. A comprehensive literature inspection till February 2023 was applied and 2765 interrelated studies were reviewed. The 27 chosen studies enclosed 15 093 subjects with AA in the chosen studies' starting point, 7141 of them were ELT, and 7952 were open surgery. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compute the value of the effect of ELT in AA on wound infection rate by the dichotomous and continuous styles and a fixed or random model. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative surgical site wound infection (SSWI). (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.83, P = 0.009) with low heterogeneity (I2  = 34%) compared to ELT in AA subjects. Although no significant difference was detected between open surgery and ELT in intra-abdominal abscess rate (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.56-1.40, P = 0.59) with moderate heterogeneity (I2  = 51%) in AA subjects. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative SSWI, however, no significant difference was found in intra-abdominal abscess rate compared to ELT in AA subjects. However, caused by the small sample sizes of several chosen studies for this meta-analysis, care must be exercised when dealing with its values.

Energy Devices for Clipless-Sutureless Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Utility and Safety

Background and Objectives: While laparoscopic appendectomy is standardized, techniques for appendiceal stump closure and mesoappendix division remain variable. Novel vessel sealing techniques are increasingly utilized ubiquitously. We sought to systematically summarize all relevant data and to define the current evidence on the safety and utility of energy devices for clipless−sutureless laparoscopic appendectomy in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: This review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Inclusion criteria included studies with laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis. The intervention included patients undergoing division of mesoappendix and/or securing of the appendicular base using diathermy (Monopolar or Bipolar or LigaSure Sealing Device) or Harmonic Scalpel (Group A) compared to patients undergoing division of mesoappendix and/or securing of the appendicular base using endoclip or Hem-o-lok or ligature (Group B). The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Downs and Black scale. The outcomes of surgical site infection (SSI) or intra-abdominal collection, postoperative ileus, average operative duration, and length of hospital stay (LHS) were compared. Results: Six comparative studies were included; three were retrospective, two were prospective, and one was ambispective. Meta-analysis revealed a shorter operative duration in Group A with respect to appendicular base ligation (MD −12.34, 95% CI −16.57 to −8.11, p < 0.00001) and mesoappendix division (MD −8.06, 95% CI −14.03 to −2.09, p = 0.008). The pooled risk ratios showed no difference in SSI between groups. Additionally, no difference was observed in LHS. The risk of postoperative ileus was higher in group B regarding mesoappendix division (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.93, p = 0.02), but no difference was found concerning appendicular base ligation. The included studies showed a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Conclusions: Clipless−sutureless laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and fast. Postoperative ileus seems less common with energy devices for mesoappendix division. However, the studies included have a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Further studies addressing the individual devices with surgeons of similar levels are needed.

Laparoscopic appendectomy, stump closure and endoloops: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the main indications for urgent surgery. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has shown advantages in terms of clinical results and cost-effectiveness, even if there is still controversy about different devices to utilize, especially with regards to the endoloop (EL) vs endostapler (ES) when it comes to stump closure.

AIM

To compare safety and cost-effectiveness of EL vs ES.

METHODS

From a prospectively maintained database, data of 996 consecutive patients treated by LA with a 3 years-follow up in the department of Emergency General Surgery - St Orsola University Hospital, Bologna (Italy) were retrieved. A meta-analysis was performed in terms of surgical complications, in comparison to the international literature published from 1995 to 2021.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis showed no evidence regarding wound infections, abdominal abscesses, and total post-operative complications, in terms of superiority of a surgical technique for the stump closure in LA.

CONCLUSION

Even when AA is complicated, the routine use of EL is safe in most patients.

Proper use of appendiceal stump closure methods for surgical site infection in laparoscopic appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

Although some studies have reported on the relationship between appendiceal stump closure methods and postoperative complications, there is no fixed method for this procedure. This study aimed to compare treatment outcomes of the existing procedures.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 200 patients who underwent urgent laparoscopic surgeries and investigated whether the difference in the appendiceal stump closure method was a risk factor for surgical site infection. The patients were divided into the Endoloop and endostapler groups, and 45 propensity score-matched patients were included. The treatment outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The patients with high body temperature showed significantly developed surgical site infection in multivariate analysis (P = .036). There was no significant difference in the appendix stump methods (Endoloop vs endostapler). Regarding postoperative complications, superficial and deep incisional surgical site infection, organ/space surgical site infection, ileus, and complications of Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or higher; there was no significant difference between the endoloop and endostapler groups after propensity score matching (P = .725, 1.000, .645 and .557, respectively).

CONCLUSION

By properly using the Endoloop and endostapler according to the severity of inflammation, the Endoloop can be safely performed in many cases. Inexpensive Endoloop as an option for stump closure methods should positively impact medical costs.

Comparison of the Electrothermal Bipolar Sealing System (LigaSure) Versus Endoloop in Pediatric Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy has long been in the process of replacing open appendectomy owing to a better wound healing, better cosmetic appearance, less pain, and less postoperative adhesion. Although there are many methods for ligating the appendix stump, studies on energy-based coagulation methods have attracted great interest in recent years. In our study, we aimed to compare the use of LigaSure™ appendiceal sealing and ligation of appendiceal stump by endoloop with regard to duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and complications in laparoscopic appendectomies. Materials and Methods: A total of 174 consecutive patients under the age of 18 who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy in our clinic between September 2016 and February 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with perforated appendicitis were excluded from the study. The patients were divided into two groups as the appendix stump was ligated with endoloop (Group 1) and sealed with LigaSure (Group 2). Demographic characteristics of the patients, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and complications were recorded. Results: Of the 132 patients who were included in the study, Group 1 consisted of patients using endoloop (n = 39) and Group 2 comprised patients that LigaSure was employed (n = 93). There was no significant difference between Groups 1 and 2 in terms of age and length of hospital stay (P = .126 and P = .784, respectively); however, the operation time was found to be significantly shorter in Group 2 (P < .001). Conclusion: The use of LigaSure is a safe and fast method to seal the mesoappendix and appendix stump in pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy. We think that infection complications due to stump leakage and intra-abdominal spillage will less be encountered.

Purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop for closing of the appendiceal stump is an alternative for endostapler in selected cases: A propensity score-matched study

INTRODUCTION

The closure of the appendiceal stump is a crucial part of a laparoscopic appendectomy, and an endoloop or endostapler is generally used. The endoloop can be more cost effective than the endostapler. However, reports have shown that the endoloop has a higher postoperative abdominal abscess rate than the endostapler in complicated appendicitis. At our institution, we perform a purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop to reduce postoperative abdominal abscess risk. This study aimed to clarify whether this method could reduce the incidence of postoperative abdominal abscess compared with the endostapler.

METHODS

Patients with acute appendicitis were classified into the purse-string suture group (n = 149) and the endostapler group (n = 82). Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching (n = 47).

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the patient characteristics and postoperative complications, including abdominal abscess. However, the purse-string suture group had more drain placement and a shorter hospital stay than the endostapler group (P = .04 and P = .02, respectively). In patients with complicated appendicitis, there was less drain placement and a shorter hospital stay in the purse-string suture group than in the endostapler group (P < .01 and P < .01, respectively). This might have reflected the difficulty of the operation. All postoperative abdominal abscesses occurred in complicated appendicitis cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoloop with additional purse-string suture had a lower incidence of abscess than previous reports of using endoloop alone. Moreover, the postoperative abdominal abscess rate is similar between the two closure methods.

Zaragoza technique of laparoscopic appendicectomy

Introduction

Appendectomy is one of the most frequent emergency surgical procedures, currently with a preference for laparoscopic management worldwide.

Objective

To report a new laparoscopic appendectomy technique and its results.

Material and methods

Cohort study of patients with a diagnosis of appendicitis who are managed laparoscopically. In a total 1063 patients, 148 were operated on with the Zaragoza technique during the period from January 2002 to December 2018. The technique consists of making a window in the appendicular base between the meso and the appendicular wall, two prolene or silk sutures are placed, and the cecal appendix is cut between the two sutures, finally the mesoappendix is sectioned with a harmonic scalpel or bipolar clamp.

Results

From our results, we had 1.4% residual abscesses, 1.4% umbilical surgical wound infection and 0% mortality.

Discussion

Various laparoscopic management methods for appendectomy are reported in the literature, with a wide range in the results. We have obtained good results in patients subjected to our technique.

Conclusions

The Zaragoza technique for laparoscopic appendectomy is an effective and safe option that prevents excessive manipulation of the inflamed appendix and is easily reproducible.

•

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common problems in daily practice.

•

Our technique is a safe method.

•

It is a reproducible and economical technique.

Endostapler vs Endoloop closure of the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: Which has better outcomes?

BACKGROUND

In laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), closure of the appendiceal stump can be achieved using either an endostapler or endoloop. We compared outcome data from utilizing either technique.

METHOD

Data was collected for all adult patients who underwent LA for appendicitis at a single institution over a 4-year period. Demographic data, complications, length of stay and hospital charges were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 501 patients underwent LA in the 4-year period. There were no differences in age, gender or BMI. Additionally, there were no differences in procedure length, readmission rates, complication rates (including intra-abdominal abscess) or hospital charges. There was a slightly shorter length of stay in the endoloop closure group (1.22 days) vs endostapler (1.38 days), p = 0.002.

CONCLUSION

Neither technique of appendiceal stump closure demonstrated a unique advantage. These findings may have relevance in low resource environments that may not have routine access to surgical staplers.

Closure of the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: A systematic review of the literature

Background

Closure of the appendiceal stump is a key step performed during laparoscopic appendicectomy. Inadequate management of the appendiceal stump has the potential to cause significant morbidity. Several methods of stump closure have been described, however high-level evidence is limited. We performed a systematic review evaluating clinical outcomes and quality of the evidence for the methods of appendiceal stump closure.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database and Google Scholar to identify studies comparing appendiceal stump closure methods in laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis from inception to October 2019. Data regarding operative duration, peri-operative complications, length of stay and costs were collated from all included studies.

Results

From 160 identified studies, 19 met the inclusion criteria. Endoloops and endoclips provide equivalent clinical outcomes at lower cost, while operative duration was shortest with endoclip closure. Endostapler devices have the lowest rate of peri-operative complications (3.56%), however their cost limits their regular use in many healthcare environments. Post-operative complication rate and length of stay were similar for all stump closure methods. Conclusion: Although there are no significant differences in method of stump closure in laparoscopic appendectomy, closure with endoclips provides the shortest operative duration. There is a need for robust and standardized reporting of cost data when comparing stump closure methods, together with higher level evidence in the form of multi-centre randomized controlled trials before firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the optimal method of stump closure.

•

Currently there is no robust higher order evidence which assesses clinical outcomes, cost and time efficiency of methods of stump closure in laparoscopic appendicectomy.

•

This is the first systematic review to investigate clinical outcomes, cost and quality of current evidence for all methods of laparoscopic appendiceal stump closure in acute appendicitis.

•

No difference was observed in methods of stump closure in complication rate, length of stay, cost, and time efficiency.

•

Endostaplers appear to provide most robust closure, albeit at a higher economic cost.

•

Endoloops appear to provide efficient and successful closure, and are currently the most frequently studied method of closure.

A systematic review on the cost evaluation of two different laparoscopic surgical techniques among 996 appendectomies from a single center

Acute appendicitis is one of the main indications for urgent surgery representing a high-volume procedure worldwide. The current spending review in Italy (and not only in this country) affects the health service and warrants care regarding the use of different surgical devices. The aim of our study is to perform a cost evaluation, comparing the use of endoloops and staplers in complicated acute appendicitis (phlegmonous and gangrenous), taking into consideration the cost of the device in relation to the management of any associated postoperative complications. We retrospectively evaluated 996 laparoscopic appendectomies of adult patients performed in the Emergency General Surgery-St. Orsola University Hospital in Bologna (Italy). Surgical procedures together with the related choice of using endoloops or staplers were performed by attending surgeons or resident surgeons supervised by a tutor. A systematic review was performed to compare our outcomes with those reported in the literature. In our experience, the routine use of endoloop leads to a real estimated saving of 375€ for each performed laparoscopic appendectomy, even considering post-operative complications. Comparing endoloop and stapler groups, the total number of complications is significantly lower in the endoloop group. Our systematic review confirmed these findings even if the superiority of one technique has not been proved yet. Our analysis shows that the routine use of endoloop is safe in most patients affected by acute appendicitis, even when complicated, and it is a cost-effective device even when taking into consideration extra costs for potential post-operative complications.

Appendiceal stump closure with polymeric clips is a reliable alternative to endostaplers

Objective

Polymeric (Hem-o-lok) clips represent a novel technique with which to ligate the appendiceal stump following laparoscopic appendectomy. We compared the outcomes of using polymeric clips versus endostaplers for complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis.

Methods

Six hundred seventy-three consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy with polymeric clips or endostaplers for acute appendicitis were assessed. The primary outcome was the incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses. Predictors of postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses were calculated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Polymeric clips were used in 65% of patients and endostaplers were used in 35%. Hem-o-lok clips were not only applied in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (83%), but also in those with complicated appendicitis (26%). The frequency of intra-abdominal abscesses using polymeric clips and endostaplers was similar in both patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (1% vs. 3%, respectively) and complicated appendicitis (2% vs. 6%, respectively). The univariate and multivariate analyses showed that the stump closure technique was not a risk factor for postoperative abscesses.

Conclusions

Closure of the appendiceal stump using the nonabsorbable Hem-o-lok ligation system in patients with both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is a safe alternative to the application of endostaplers.

Are endoscopic loop ties safe even in complicated acute appendicitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is amongst the most common general surgical procedures and the laparoscopic approach is recognized and recommended by international guidelines as a valid option. The different closure techniques of the appendicular stump constitute a matter of debate since their possible implication in determining postoperative infectious complications. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to compare endostapler versus endoscopic loop ties for stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

This is a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized trials and cohort studies comparing endostapler with endoscopic loop ties for the closure of appendicular sump in laparoscopy appendectomy. Subgroup analysis of pediatric patients and patients with complicated appendicitis were performed when data were available. Complicated acute appendicitis was defined as in case of gangrenous/necrotic appendix or perforated appendix. Main outcomes were wound infection rate, intra-abdominal infection rate, length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates.

RESULTS

a total of 5934 patients from 14 studies were included in the analysis. Endostapler was associated with a similar intra-abdominal abscess rate (RR 0.88, 95%C.I. 0.54-1.43) but a lower incidence of wound infection (RR 0.54, 95%C.I. 0.22-0.97) Length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates were similar. In subgroups analysis endostapler reduces significantly the wound infection rate in pediatric patients; no differences in main outcomes were observed in patients with complicated acute appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

In complicated acute appendicitis the stump closure technique did not affect outcomes; the use of endostapler seems to be associated to a reduction of wound infection rate in pediatric patients with non-complicated acute appendicitis.

Re-evaluation of purse string suture in laparoscopic appendectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) using purse string invaginating sutures (PS) with those using intracorporeal knotting (IK) or Hem-o-lock polymeric clips (HL).

METHODS

A total of 882 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy from January 2015 to December 2017 were studied retrospectively. Of these, 538 patients used PS, 229 patients used IK and 115 patients used HL to close the appendiceal stump. Their demographic characteristics, intraoperative findings and postoperative complications were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

There were similar percentages of complicated cases in all the groups (21.7% in PS vs. 21.4% in IK vs. 24.3% in HL, p = 0.803). The mean length of hospital stay was shorter in PS group when compared to IK or HL group (3.72 + 2.35 in PS vs. 4.41 + 2.40 in IK, 4.43 + 2.66 in HL, p < 0.05) as well as lower ASA scores (1.7 + 0.6 in PS vs. 1.8 + 0.6 in IK vs. 1.7 + 0.6 in HL, p < 0.05). The overall complication rates for the PS, the HL and the IK groups were 12.1, 8.7 and 9.2%, respectively. The rate of wound infection was higher in PS group for uncomplicated appendicitis (5.0% in PS vs. 2.8% in IK and 1.1% in HL, p = 0.129). Furthermore, there were no differences in the rate of intra-abdominal infection among the groups in both uncomplicated and complicated cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, purse string suture failed to demonstrate better postoperative outcome in laparoscopic appendectomy and is no longer recommended by our institution as initial approach.

A clinical comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the treatment of complicated appendicitis: historical cohort study

Background

Appendectomy is one of the most common operations. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered first-line treatment, but the use of LA for treatment of complicated appendicitis remains controversial. Here, we performed a retrospective analysis to compare clinical outcomes between patients treated with LA and those who underwent open appendectomy (OA).

Methods

Data for 179 patients who underwent an operation for the treatment of complicated appendicitis at our hospital between 2011 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The selection included 89 patients who underwent a conventional appendectomy and 90 patients who were treated laparoscopically. Outcome measures such as mean operative time, blood loss, time until oral intake duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the concurrent effects of the examined factors on the rate of postoperative complications.

Results

The mean ages of patients in the OA and LA groups were 50.17 ± 22.77 and 50.13 ± 25.84 year. Mean operative times were longer in the LA group than OA (10.2.56 ± 44.4 versus 85.4 ± 43.11 min; p = 0.009). The duration of hospital stay was shorter for the LA group (9.61 ± 5.57 versus 12.19 ± 8.4; p = 0.016). There were no significant differences in return to consumption of oral intake between the LA and OA groups (2.03 ± 1.66 versus 2.48 ± 2.17; p = 0.123). Multivariable analysis found that the rate of postoperative complications was significantly reduced for the LA group, in comparison with the postoperative-complication rate of the OA group (16.7% versus 27%; odds ratio 0.376; 95% CI 0.153–0.923; p = 0.0327).

Conclusions

These results suggest that LA is a safe and efficient operative procedure that provides clinically beneficial advantages in comparison with OA. Thus, when possible, appendectomy for complicated appendicitis should be attempted using a laparoscopic approach.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered.

Staplers vs. loop-ligature: a cost analysis from the hospital payer perspective

BACKGROUND

Presently, there is equipoise regarding the surgical technique used to manage the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. The purpose of this research was to determine whether the routine use of loop ligature, compared to stapling, is cost effective from a hospital payer perspective.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted amongst patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis at two major academic hospitals. In order to eliminate possible systematic bias arising from one technique being preferentially employed with more complex presentations, patients were divided into study groups based on the technique routinely employed by their surgeon, loop ligature (LLA) versus stapler (LSA). Pediatric patients and open appendectomies were excluded. Costs were determined using a previously published model derived from publicly available data from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative, in conjunction with local cost data for disposable procurement. Secondary outcomes included operating room time, length of stay, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Between Jan 1, 2014 and Dec 31, 2015, 567 adult patients had an emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. In comparing surgeons who routinely employed LLA to LSA, there was a significant decrease in total mean hospital cost with LLA ($1988 ± $143 vs. $2253 ± $99, p = 0.002). In addition, mean disposable cost was reduced for surgeons using LLA ($310 ± $27 vs. $668 ± $26, p < 0.001). This reduction in cost was not associated with a difference in length of stay (1.5 vs. 1.4 days, p = 0.28) or complication rates (8% vs. 10%, p = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that surgeons who routinely use loop ligature to secure the appendiceal base during emergency laparoscopic appendectomy offer more cost-effective care compared to stapler users, saving their institution more than $200 per case with no clear disadvantages. A shift from routine use of staplers to loop ligature should result in significant overall cost savings to the hospital.

Securing the Appendiceal Stump During Emergency Appendicectomy: Options and Influencing Factors in Current UK Surgical Practice

INTRODUCTION

The aim of our study was to identify the most commonly employed methods and influencing factors for securing the appendiceal stump in current NHS practice.

METHODS

An electronic survey of the Scottish Surgical Research Group network, invitation extended to the UK National Research Collaborative.

RESULTS

A total of 111 responses were received from 32 surgical centers; 28 (25.2%) consultants, 66 (59.5%) specialty trainees and 12 (10.8%) core trainees. Endoscopic ligatures were the preferred method in 96 (86.5%) with no difference in those with the greatest operative experience (P=0.79), 12 (10.8%) preferred polymeric clips. Ease of application (70.3%) and severity of stump inflammation (65.8%) had the greatest influence on the method chosen. Cost was a factor in 36.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The preferred method for securing the appendiceal stump in UK practice is endoscopic ligatures regardless of operative experience. Factors with the greatest influence on the method employed include the ease of application and severity of stump inflammation. Our findings are likely to be representative of current NHS practice in Scotland.

Looped suture versus stapler device in pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparative outcomes and intraoperative cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Appendiceal ligation during pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) may be performed using looped suture versus stapler. Controversy regarding the utility of either method exists. Clinical outcomes and cost analysis of LA with both methods were compared.

METHODS

All pediatric LA were performed from fiscal years 2013 and 2014 by two pediatric surgeons. While one surgeon used looped suture, the other used stapler exclusively. chi-Square tests were performed to analyze associations.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-eight cases were analyzed where looped suture versus stapler LA was performed in 46% and 54% of patients, respectively. Operating room costs were $317.10 and $707.12/person for looped suture and stapler LA, respectively (P<0.0001). Difference in cost of $390.02/person was attributed solely to ligation type. On bivariate analysis, rate of in-hospital complications, length of stay, return-to-ER and readmission within 30 days did not significantly differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

A comparative analysis of looped suture versus stapler device during LA for pediatric appendicitis revealed that postoperative complications, length of stay, ER visits and readmissions were not significantly different. Looped suture LA was significantly more cost efficient than stapler LA. In pediatric appendicitis, appendiceal ligation during LA may be performed safely and cost effectively with looped suture versus stapler.

TYPE OF STUDY

Cost effectiveness LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Endoloop versus endostapler: what is the best option for appendiceal stump closure in children with complicated appendicitis? Results of a multicentric international survey

BACKGROUND

There is a limited and conflicting evidence about the most appropriate method for appendiceal stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). We aimed to compare endoloop (EL) versus endostapler (ES) for stump closure during LA for complicated perforated appendicitis in children.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 708 patients (463 boys and 245 girls with an average age of 9.8 years) who underwent LA for complicated appendicitis in 5 international centers of Pediatric Surgery over a 5-years period (January 2011-December 2016). The appendix was perforated with localized peritonitis in 470 cases and diffuse peritonitis in 238 patients. EL was used in 374 cases (G1), whereas ES was adopted in 334 cases (G2).

RESULTS

No intra-operative complication occurred in both groups but 5 conversions to open surgery were reported in G1 (1.3%) and 4 in G2 (1.1%) (OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.30-4.19). Use of EL was significantly associated with higher incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.84-2.18), postoperative ileus (OR 3.61; 95% CI 0.76-17.11), and re-operations/readmissions (OR 6.46; 95% CI 1.46-28.62) compared to ES. The average cost of supplies for LA was significantly higher in G2 (€ 915.60) compared to G1 (€ 578.36) (p = 0.0001). The average cost of re-operations/readmissions was significantly higher in G1 (€ 4.091,39) compared to G2 (€ 2.127,88) (p = 0.0001) (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.47-2.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first in the pediatric population to demonstrate that the method used for appendiceal stump closure may influence the outcome of LA in complicated appendicitis. Although ES is more expensive compared to EL, our results demonstrated that appendix stump closure should be performed using ES rather than EL in complicated perforated appendicitis since its use was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess and postoperative ileus and lower re-operations and readmissions rates and costs.

Closure methods of the appendix stump for complications during laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is amongst the most common general surgical procedures performed in the developed world. Arguably, the most critical part of this procedure is effective closure of the appendix stump to prevent catastrophic intra-abdominal complications from a faecal leak into the abdominal cavity. A variety of methods to close the appendix stump are used worldwide; these can be broadly divided into traditional ligatures (such as intracorporeal or extracorporeal ligatures or Roeder loops) and mechanical devices (such as stapling devices, clips, or electrothermal devices). However, the optimal method remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To compare all surgical techniques now used for appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2017, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 14 June 2017), Embase Ovid (1974 to 14 June 2017), Science Citation Index - Expanded (14 June 2017), China Biological Medicine Database (CBM), the World Health Organization International Trials Registry Platform search portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, the Chinese Clinical Trials Register, and the EU Clinical Trials Register (all in June 2017). We searched the reference lists of relevant publications as well as meeting abstracts and Conference Proceedings Citation Index to look for additional relevant clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared mechanical appendix stump closure (stapler, clips, or electrothermal devices) versus ligation (Endoloop, Roeder loop, or intracorporeal knot techniques) for uncomplicated appendicitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors identified trials for inclusion, collected data, and assessed risk of bias independently. We performed the meta-analysis using Review Manager 5. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight randomised studies encompassing 850 participants. Five studies compared titanium clips versus ligature, two studies compared an endoscopic stapler device versus ligature, and one study compared an endoscopic stapler device, titanium clips, and ligature. In our analyses of primary outcomes, we found no differences in total complications (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.50, 8 RCTs, very low-quality evidence), intraoperative complications (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.55, 8 RCTs, very low-quality evidence), or postoperative complications (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.13, 8 RCTs, very low-quality evidence) between ligature and all types of mechanical devices. However, our analyses of secondary outcomes revealed that use of mechanical devices saved approximately nine minutes of total operating time when compared with use of a ligature (mean difference (MD) -9.04 minutes, 95% CI -12.97 to -5.11 minutes, 8 RCTs, very low-quality evidence). However, this finding did not translate into a clinically or statistically significant reduction in inpatient hospital stay (MD 0.02 days, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.17 days, 8 RCTs, very low-quality evidence). Available information was insufficient for reliable comparison of total hospital costs and postoperative pain/quality of life between the two approaches. Overall, evidence across all analyses was of very low quality, with substantial potential for confounding factors. Given the limitations of all studies in terms of bias and the low quality of available evidence, a clear conclusion regarding superiority of any one particular type of mechanical device over another is not possible.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is insufficient at present to advocate omission of conventional ligature-based appendix stump closure in favour of any single type of mechanical device over another in uncomplicated appendicitis.

Endostapler versus Hem-O-Lok clip to secure the appendiceal stump and mesoappendix during laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Our study evaluates the safety and cost of using the Hem-O-Lok (HOL) clip in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHOD

We prospectively compared 30-day postoperative outcomes and cost between HOL clip and endoscopic stapler (ES) in LA at a single institution.

RESULTS

HOL clip was used in 45 out of 92 LA. Perforated appendicitis (29.8% vs. 11.1%, P = 0.027) and postoperative complications were more common in the ES group (19.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.009). In multivariate analysis, HOL clip was associated with lower complications rate (OR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.003-0.744; p = 0.030). In propensity score matched cohort, complications were not different (p > 0.05). In patients with non-perforated appendicitis, HOL use increased operative time by 10 min on average (p = 0.004). Minimum ES cost per single appendectomy was $273.13, while HOL clip cost was $32.14.

CONCLUSION

The use of HOL clip in LA is safe and it reduced the costs of the procedure in comparison to the use of ES.

Safety and Efficacy of Polymeric Clips for Appendiceal Stump Closure

Background and Objectives:

Laparoscopic appendectomy remains one of the most common emergency general surgical procedures in the United States. In an era of increasing focus on costs in medical care, we sought to evaluate the use of polymeric clips to secure the appendiceal base during laparoscopic appendectomy.

Methods:

We performed a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy from April 2013 through September 2014 at a single academic teaching institution. Polymeric clips were used to secure the appendiceal stump. Tissue dissection techniques and control of the mesoappendix were the operating surgeon's choice. Clinical outcomes are reported.

Results:

A total of 25 patients (56% women; mean age, 41 y; body mass index of 29 kg/m²) were enrolled in our study and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy with polymeric clips. One patient was unable to have polymeric clips placed due to inflammation of the appendiceal base. There were no major perioperative complications. One patient developed a suture abscess in the umbilical incision, and another had prolonged ileus with computed tomography demonstrating persistent pelvic fluid that did not require intervention. Median length of stay was 1 d and mean length of follow-up was 81 d. The use of polymeric clips contributed ∼ $32 to the overall operative cost.

Conclusions:

Polymeric clips are a safe alternative for securing the appendiceal base in laparoscopic appendectomy. They offer significant cost savings without any evidence of increased complications.

Methodological overview of systematic reviews to establish the evidence base for emergency general surgery

BACKGROUND

The evidence for treatment decision-making in emergency general surgery has not been summarized previously. The aim of this overview was to review the quantity and quality of systematic review evidence for the most common emergency surgical conditions.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of the most common conditions requiring unplanned admission and treatment managed by general surgeons were eligible for inclusion. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases were searched to April 2014. The number and type (randomized or non-randomized) of included studies and patients were extracted and summarized. The total number of unique studies was recorded for each condition. The nature of the interventions (surgical, non-surgical invasive or non-invasive) was documented. The quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

The 106 included reviews focused mainly on bowel conditions (42), appendicitis (40) and gallstone disease (17). Fifty-one (48·1 per cent) included RCTs alone, 79 (74·5 per cent) included at least one RCT and 25 (23·6 per cent) summarized non-randomized evidence alone. Reviews included 727 unique studies, of which 30·3 per cent were RCTs. Sixty-five reviews compared different types of surgical intervention and 27 summarized trials of surgical versus non-surgical interventions. Fifty-seven reviews (53·8 per cent) were rated as low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

This overview of reviews highlights the need for more and better research in this field.

Laparosocopic Appendectomy, Cost-Effectiveness of Three Different Techniques Used to Close the Appendix Stump

It is generally agreed that laparoscopic appendectomy is a valuable operative method. The aim of the study was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of three different techniques used to close the appendix stump.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that compared three groups of patients who were operated on laparoscopically for acute appendicitis in 2013 at our institution. We used an endoscopic clip to close the appendix stump in the first group (n=20), endoscopic stapler was applied in the second group (n=20), and in the third group of patients the appendix base was closed with a laparoscopic suture (n=20). These groups were matched by age, sex and BMI.

RESULTS

The average operative cost was the highest in the second group. Cost of the laparoscopic appendectomy with the application of the endoscopic clip was significantly lower (first group) and comparable to the third group. Observed differences in total hospitalization costs were associated only with the chosen appendix stump closure technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Clip closure of the appendix base is an easy and cost-effective procedure. The laparoscopic suture technique is the cheapest but technically demanding. According to our experience endoscopic stapler may be useful in some cases, although it is the most expensive method.

Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis.

Comparison the effect of stump closure by endoclips versus endoloop on the duration of surgery and complications in patients under laparoscopic appendectomy: A randomized clinical trial

Background:

Laparoscopic appendectomy is a well-described surgical technique. However, concerns still exist regarding whether the closure of the appendiceal stump should be done with a clip, an endoloop, or other techniques. In this study, the effect of stump closure on duration of surgery and complications by endoclips was compared with endoloop in patients under laparoscopic appendectomy. The study was carried out as a prospective randomized clinical trial between 2013 and 2015 in Shariati Hospital of Tehran.

Materials and Methods:

Seventy-six patients under laparoscopic appendectomy were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either endoclips or endoloop for stump closure. The results in terms of the operating time, length of hospital stay, and the complications were compared and analyzed between two groups. After collecting the essential data by using a checklist and examination of patients, the data were analyzed with SPSS.

Results:

The mean age was 23.13 ± 5.07 years and 44.7% of the patients were male. Moreover, in this study, it was seen that the mean duration of surgery was 23.2 min versus 21.5 min in endoloop and endoclips groups, respectively (P = 0.021). There was no difference between hospital stay among two groups (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the complications were same in two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

The effect of stump closure with endoloop versus endoclips is not different for complications, but the duration of surgery was shorter in endoclips method. Both methods could be used based on the opinion of the surgeon without expecting a statistically significant difference in the results.

WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.

Endoloops or endostapler use in laparoscopic appendectomy for acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis : No difference in infectious complications

BACKGROUND

The most appropriate closure for the appendicular stump with either endoloops or an endostapler in laparoscopic appendectomy remains unclear and under debate because of limited and conflicting evidence.

METHODS

In a 2-month prospective, observational, resident-led nationwide cohort study, patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis were analysed. Logistic regression analyses were performed for identifying the possible effect of stump closure type and other risk factors for infectious complications.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis was performed in 1369 patients in 62 hospitals; endoloops were used in 76.7 % and an endostapler in other patients. Median operating time was not different between endoloop and endostapler use (42.0 vs. 44.0 min, P = 0.243). A superficial surgical site infection was seen in 2.0 % after uncomplicated appendicitis and in 0.8 % after complicated appendicitis. The intra-abdominal abscess rate was 1.9 % after uncomplicated and 11.0 % after complicated appendicitis. No significant effect of stump closure type was observed for any infectious complication (OR 1.05; 95 % CI 0.625-1.766, P = 0.853) or an intra-abdominal abscess (OR OR 0.96; 95 % CI 0.523-1.768, P = 0.899). In multivariable analysis, complicated appendicitis was identified as the only independent risk factor for an intra-abdominal abscess (OR 6.26; 95 % CI 3.454-11.341, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The infectious complication rate is not influenced by the type of appendicular stump closure with either endoloops or an endostapler in this study. If technically feasible, closure with endoloops is advised for cost considerations.

Comparison of the results of laparoscopic appendectomies with application of different techniques for closure of the appendicular stump

Background

Nowadays laparoscopy is used frequently not only in elective surgery but also in abdominal emergencies, including acute appendicitis. There are several techniques used to close the appendicular stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. The aim of the study was to present and compare the results of minimally invasive appendectomies performed with the use of endoscopic staplers (group A), titanium endoclips (group B) and invaginating sutures (group C).

Methods

Three hundred seven patients (mean age = 35.6; SD = 15.9; 178 males,129 females) operated on laparoscopically for acute appendicitis from January 2010 to December 2014 at our department were included in the study. We reviewed retrospectively patients’ data including: age, sex, duration of the surgical procedure and hospital stay, mortality, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates in all analyzed groups.

Results

There were 102 patients in group A (mean age = 35.8;SD = 15.4; 57 males, 45 females). The average hospital stay in this group was 4.3 days (SD = 1.7), average operation time was 62.0 min (SD = 15), postoperative complication rate was 5.9 %. There were 160 patients in group B (mean age = 35.0; SD = 16.3; 96 males, 64 females). The average hospital stay in this group was 3.6 days (SD = 1.4), average operation time was 62.9 min (SD = 13.5), postoperative complication rate was 5.6 %. There were 45 patients in group C (mean age =37.3; SD = 15.8; 25 males, 20 females). The average hospital stay in this group was 4.6 days (SD = 2.0), average operation time was 73.9 min (SD = 20.8), postoperative complication rate was 6.7 %. There were no intraoperative complications and no mortality in all compared groups of patients operated on laparoscopically for acute appendicitis.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic appendectomies with application of different techniques for closure of the appendicular stump are useful and safe. In our study the shortest hospital stay and lowest complication rate were observed in patients operated with the use of titanium endoclips. The longest hospital stay and operation time and the highest complication rate was associated with the use of invaginating sutures.

Emergency laparoscopy: Role and implementation

Laparoscopic surgery has emerged over the past two decades as the surgical approach of choice in the treatment of many digestive disorders. Laparoscopy has its place in the management of abdominal surgical emergencies since it provides the same benefits: less postoperative pain and shorter length of hospital stay when compared to laparotomy. However, its role in the management of abdominal emergencies has not yet been fully clarified. In this review, we focus on what has been validated concerning the role of emergency laparoscopy in the management of abdominal diseases.

Methods for closure of appendix stump during laparoscopic appendectomy procedure

The most frequent abdominal pathology requiring emergent surgery is acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy has been performed for the treatment of acute appendicitis since 1983. Closure of the appendix stump is vital to prevent severe postoperative complications. Different methods are described for closure such as stapler, endoloop, titanium clips, non-absorbable polymer clips (hem-o-lok clip), handmade loops, transsection by Ligasure or with bipolar cautery. The ideal method should be safe, applicable and cheap. The most appropriate method remains to be controversial. All methods are reported as safe, but some have higher costs, and some prolong the operation. In this article, we reviewed clinical and experimental studies on different methods of stump closure, and we tried to compare the benefit of these methods over others.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for complicated appendicitis in adults: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess whether laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for complicated appendicitis (CA) effectively reduces the incidence of postoperative complications and improves various measurements of postoperative recovery in adults compared with open appendectomy (OA).

METHODS

This single-center, randomized controlled trial was performed in the Nagoya Daini Red Cross Hospital. Patients diagnosed as having CA with peritonitis or abscess formation were eligible to participate and were randomly assigned to an LA group or an OA group. The primary study outcome was development of infectious complications, especially surgical site infection (SSI), within 30 days of surgery.

RESULTS

Between October 2008 and August 2014, 81 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned with a 1:1 allocation ratio (42, LA; 39, OA). All were eligible for study of the primary endpoint. Groups were well balanced in terms of patient characteristics and preoperative levels of C-reactive protein. SSI occurred in 14 LA group patients (33.3 %) and in 10 OA group patients (25.6 %) (OR 1.450, 95 % CI 0.553-3.800; p = 0.476). Overall, the rate of postoperative complications, including incisional or organ/space SSI and stump leakage, did not differ significantly between groups. No significant differences between groups were found in hospital stay, duration of drainage, analgesic use, or parameters for postoperative recovery except days to walking.

CONCLUSION

These results suggested that LA for CA is safe and feasible, while the distinguishing benefit of LA was not validated in this clinical trial.

Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique in patients with complicated and noncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background and aim

In our study we aimed to compare laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique (base of the appendix was ligated with 20 cm of 2.0 silk) in patients with complicated acute appendicitis (CAA) and noncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Patients and methods

Ninety patients (female/male: 40/50, age ranging from 16 to 60 years, median age and interquartile range [IQR]: 25 [20; 32] years) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were included in the study. The patients were evaluated for the type of acute appendicitis, duration of operation, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

Results

The number of cases diagnosed as CAA was 28 (31.1%), and the number of noncomplicated cases was 62 (68.9%). We found that there was no significant difference in postoperative complication rates between complicated and noncomplicated appendicitis cases. Incision site infection was seen in seven cases (7.8%) and ileus was seen in two cases (2.2%). Bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, and appendix stump leakage were not observed in any of the cases. Median and IQR duration of operation were 42 (35; 52) minutes and median and IQR duration of hospital stay were detected as 2 (1; 2) (range 1–10) days.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique may be a safe, effective, and reliable technique as the materials needed for closing the appendix stumps are easily available for both CAA cases and noncomplicated cases.

The TICAP-Study (titanium clips for appendicular stump closure): A prospective multicentre observational study on appendicular stump closure with an innovative titanium clip

Background

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the DS Titanium Ligation Clip for appendicular stump closure in laparoscopic appendectomy.

Methods

Overall, 502 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy were recruited for this observational multicentre study in nine study centres between October 2011 and July 2013. The clip was finally applied in 390 patients. Primary outcome variables were feasibility of the clip, intra-abdominal surgical site (abscesses, stump leakages) and superficial wound infections. Patients were followed 30 days after surgery.

Results

The clip was applicable in nearly 80 % of patients. Reasons for not applying the clip were mainly an inflamed caecum or a too large diameter of the appendix base. Superficial wound infections were found in nine (2.31 %), intra-abdominal abscesses in five (1.28 %), appendicular stump leak in one (0.26 %), and other adverse events in 22 (5.64 %) patients. In total, 12 (3.08 %) patients were re-admitted to hospital for treatment. Seven re-admissions were surgery-related; ten (2.56 %) patients had to be re-operated. One patient died during the course of the study due to persisting peritonitis (mortality 0.26 %).

Conclusions

The results suggest that the DS Titanium Ligation Clip is a safe and effective option in securing the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy. The complication rates found with the use of the DS-Clip are comparable to the rates in the literature when other methods are used.

Trial Registration

NCT01734837.

[Stump closure in laparoscopic appendectomy. Influence of endoloop or linear stapler on patient outcome]

BACKGROUND

Even though laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the most frequent procedures in abdominal surgery, the technique of appendiceal stump closure is still not standardized. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the effect of the use of endoloops or linear staplers for appendiceal stump closure concerning surgical site infections (SSI) and intra-abdominal abscesses (IAA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All laparoscopic appendectomies between January 1st 2007 and May 31st 2010 were split into an endoloop group (ELG) and a linear stapler group (LSG). The groups were compared with respect to the outcome parameters SSI and IAA.

RESULTS

A total of 430 appendectomies were performed in the study period of which 105 operations were conducted laparoscopically. In this study 47.6 % (n = 50) were alloted to the LSG and 52.4 % (n = 55) to ELG. In LSG 3.1 % (n = 1) developed an SSI versus 10.0 % (n = 4, p = 0.254) in ELG. No IAAs occurred in LSG compared to 2 (5.1 %, p = 0.499) in ELG.

CONCLUSION

The use of EL for appendiceal stump closure is safe and cost effective for low-grade appendicitis but high-grade appendicitis should be treated with LS.

Management of appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy--clips or ligature: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Appendicular stump closure is a crucial step during laparoscopic appendectomy. Recently, endoclips (ECs) have been described for ligation of the appendicular stump. The objective of this review was to compare outcomes with EC versus endoligature (EL) for appendiceal stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar was performed to identify studies comparing use of EL versus EC in laparoscopic appendectomy between January 1992 and September 2013. Reviews of each study were conducted, and data were extracted. The random-effects model was used to combine data, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed.

RESULTS

Seven of the 101 identified studies met the inclusion criteria: four randomized controlled trials and three case controlled series. For the primary outcome of perioperative and postoperative complications, there was no significant difference between the EC versus EL groups. No differences were noted in length of hospital stay. However, a significant reduction in operative time was observed with EC as opposed to EL (standardized mean difference=-0.90, 95% confidence interval=-1.26 to -0.54, P=.001). Moreover, EC procedures were less expensive than EL procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

EC application in the management of appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy appears to be simple, efficacious, safe, and a cost-effective alternative.

Laparoscopic treatment of perforated appendicitis

The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with less wound pain, less wound infection, a shorter hospital stay, and faster overall recovery when compared to the open appendectomy for uncomplicated cases. In the past two decades, the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of perforated appendicitis to take the advantages of minimally invasiveness has increased. This article reviewed the prevalence, approaches, safety disclaimers, perioperative and postoperative outcomes of the laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of patients with perforated appendicitis. Special issues including the conversion, interval appendectomy, laparoscopic approach for elderly or obese patient are also discussed to define the role of laparoscopic treatment for patients with perforated appendicitis.

Is laparoscopic appendectomy going to be standard procedure for acute appendicitis; a 5-year single center experience with 1,788 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether laparoscopic appendectomy can be the gold standard for acute appendicitis regarding the applicability and cost effectivity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included patients who were operated by laparoscopically for acute appendicitis between January 2008 and September 2012. Patients' sex, ages, hospitalization time, the type for closure of the appendiceal stump, complication rate, surgery time and other parameters were recorded.

RESULTS

1,788 patients with acute appendicitis on laparoscopic evaluation constituted the study population. Average age of the patient group was 30.1 ± 2.3 years old. Average hospitalization time was 1.2 ± 1.1 days. Metal clips were used in 1,100 (61.5%) patients, intracorporeal knotting was performed in the remaining. Total complication rate was 3.8%.

CONCLUSION

By the using of metal clips and increased experience; laparoscopy may be gold standard for acute appendicitis.

Staple line as a cause of unusual early internal hernia after appendectomy

The use of mechanical stapling devices in laparoscopic appendectomies has become a common practice. Occasionally, the retained staples have been described to cause adhesions that might result in bowel obstruction. Early bowel obstruction after routine abdominal surgery should be closely investigated and might warrant early re-exploration. We present a rare case of small bowel obstruction caused by a staple line adhesive band one week after appendectomy. A 46-year-old female underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis. A linear endoscopic stapling device was utilized during the procedure. The patient was discharged without complication. One week later, the patient presented to the emergency room for abdominal pain and she was discharged after adequate pain control. Several hours later she returned with similar symptoms, and she was diagnosed with distal small bowel obstruction by computed tomography scan. During the diagnostic laparoscopy there was an internal hernia through a defect created by the appendiceal staple line and the adjacent small bowel mesentery. After reduction of the hernia, the small bowel venous drainage improved, and no intestinal resection was necessary. The offending staple was removed and the staple line covered with omentum. The patient had complete resolution of symptoms and she was discharged the following day. No perioperative complications occurred. Mechanical staplers are routinely used in laparoscopic appendectomy. The staple line should be inspected at the end of the procedure to confirm the absence of free, unformed staples that can generate adhesions and postoperative complications.

Acute appendicitis: position paper, WSES, 2013

Appendectomy is one of the most frequently performed operative procedures in general surgery departments of every size and category. Laparoscopic Appendectomy – LA - as compared to Open Appendectomy – OA - was very controversial at first but has found increasing acceptance all over the World, although the percentage of its acceptance is different in the various single National setting. Various meta-analyses and Cochrane reviews have compared LA with OA and different technical details. Furthermore, new surgical methods have recently emerged, namely, the single-port/incision laparoscopic appendectomy and NOTES technique. Their distribution among the hospitals, however, is unclear. Using laparoscopic mini-instruments with trocars of 2–3.5 mm diameter is proposed as a reliable alternative due to less postoperative pain and improved aesthetics. How to proceed in case of an inconspicuous appendix during a procedure planned as an appendectomy remains controversial despite existing study results. But the main question still is: operate or not operate an acute appendicitis, in the meaning of an attempt of a conservative antibiotic therapy. Therefore, we have done a literature survey on the performance of appendectomies and their technical details as well as the management of the intraoperative finding of an inconspicuous appendix in order to write down – under the light of the latest evidence – a position paper.

Duration of antibiotic treatment after appendicectomy for acute complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic treatment after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis aims to reduce postoperative infections. However, available data on the duration of treatment are limited. This study compared the difference in infectious complications between two protocols, involving either 3 or 5 days of postoperative antibiotic treatment.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of all adult patients who had an appendicectomy between January 2004 and December 2010 at either one of two hospitals in the same region. At location A, the protocol included 3 days of postoperative antibiotic treatment, whereas at location B it specified 5 days. The primary outcome was the development of postoperative infections as either superficial wound infection or deep intra-abdominal infections.

RESULTS

A total of 1143 patients with acute appendicitis underwent appendicectomy, of whom 267 (23.4 per cent) had complicated appendicitis. The duration of postoperative antibiotic treatment was 3 days in 135 patients (50.6 per cent) and at least 5 days in 123 (46.1 per cent). No difference was found between antibiotic treatment for 3 or 5 days in terms of developing an intra-abdominal abscess (odds ratio (OR) 1.77, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.68 to 4.58; P = 0.242) or a wound infection (OR 2.74, 0.54 to 13.80; P = 0.223). In patients with complicated appendicitis, the laparoscopic approach was identified as a risk factor for developing an intra-abdominal abscess in univariable analysis (OR 2.46, 1.00 to 6.04; P = 0.049), but was not confirmed as an independent risk factor for this complication in multivariable analysis (OR 2.32, 0.75 to 7.14; P = 0.144).

CONCLUSION

After appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis, 3 days of antibiotic treatment is equally effective as 5 days in reducing postoperative infections.

Laparoscopic appendectomy: State of the art. Tailored approach to the application of laparoscopic appendectomy?

Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in developed countries. The treatment of acute appendicitis is either open or laparoscopic appendectomy. The latter has gained wide acceptance in the past years, although the debate on the true merits of laparoscopic appendectomy is still on going. Some authors prefer this approach as the gold standard for all patients, but in our opinion a tailored approach is warranted for specific patient groups. In addition, a standardised guideline on the technical aspects is still lacking. In the current article, open versus laparoscopic appendectomy and several technical aspects, such as stump closure, appendix extraction and single incision are discussed laparoscopic appendectomy are being addressed. In the future perspectives we will briefly discuss the third 'newly' introduced antibiotic treatment.

Laparoscopic-assisted single-port appendectomy in children: it is a safe and cost-effective alternative to conventional laparoscopic techniques?

Aim. Laparoscopic-assisted single-port appendectomy (SPA), although combining the advantages of open and conventional laparoscopic surgery, is still not widely used in childhood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and the cost effectiveness of SPA in children. Methods. After institutional review board approval, we retrospectively evaluated 262 children who underwent SPA. The appendix was dissected outside the abdominal cavity as in open surgery. For stump closure, we used two 3/0 vicryl RB-1 sutures. Results. We identified 146 boys (55.7%) and 116 girls (44.3%). Median age at operation was 11.4 years (range, 1.1–15.9). Closure of the appendiceal stump using two sutures (cost: USD 15) was successful in all patients. Neither a stapler (cost: USD 276) nor endoloops (cost: USD 89) were used. During a follow-up of up to 69 months (range, 30–69), six obese children (2.3%, body mass index >95th percentile) developed an intra-abdominal abscess after perforated appendicitis. No insufficiency of the appendiceal stump was observed by ultrasound. Five of them were treated successfully by antibiotics, one child required drainage. Conclusion. The SPA technique with conventional extracorporal closure of the appendiceal stump is safe and cost effective. In our unit, SPA is the standard procedure for appendectomy in children.