Laparoscopy: a safe approach to appendicitis during pregnancy

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.

Open versus laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pregnancy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the standard treatment for acute appendicitis (AA) in general population. However, the safety of LA during pregnancy has remained a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical and obstetrical outcomes in pregnant women who underwent LA vs. open appendectomy (OA) for AA. We hypothesized that LA results in improved surgical and obstetric outcomes during pregnancy.

METHODS

Using a nationwide claim-based database in Estonia, a retrospective review of all cases of pregnant women undergoing OA or LA for AA from 2010 to 2020 was performed. Patient characteristics, surgical and obstetrical outcomes were analyzed. Primary outcomes were preterm delivery, fetal loss and perinatal mortality. Secondary outcomes included operative time, hospital length of stay (HLOS) and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 102 patients were included of whom 68 (67%) underwent OA and 34 patients (33%) LA, respectively. Patients in LA cohort had a significantly shorter length of pregnancy in terms of gestational weeks when compared to OA cohort (12 weeks versus 17 weeks, p = 0.002). Most of the patients in their 3^rd trimester pregnancy were subjected to OA. Operative time in LA cohort was shorter than in OA cohort (34 min. versus 44 min., p = 0.038). HLOS in LA cohort was shorter than in OA cohort (2.1 days versus 2.9 days, p = 0.016). There were no differences between OA and LA cohorts in terms of surgical complications or obstetrical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis was associated with a significantly shorter operative time and a shorter hospital length of stay while open and laparoscopic appendectomy cohorts experienced comparable obstetrical outcomes. Our findings support the laparoscopic approach for acute appendicitis in pregnancy.

[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.

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.

Safety of appendectomy during pregnancy in the totally laparoscopic age

Purpose

Acute appendicitis is the most common nonobstetric indication for surgical intervention during pregnancy. In the argument of the optimal surgical approach to acute appendicitis in pregnancy, laparoscopy seems to be won with a similar complication rate and shorter postoperative recovery than open. We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of appendectomy in pregnant and nonpregnant women in the totally laparoscopic age.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 556 nonincidental appendectomies performed in women (aged 18–45 years) between January 2014 and December 2018. To reduce the confounding effects, we used propensity score considering the variables age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, and the operative finding; whether the appendicitis was simple or complicated. After propensity score matching, the outcomes of 15 pregnant women were compared with those of the 30 nonpregnant women.

Results

All the operations were performed with laparoscopy. Most of the pregnant cases were in their first and second trimester. The postoperative morbidity rate was significantly higher in the pregnant group before propensity score matching; however, the significance disappeared after matching. Operative outcomes and the parameters related to the postoperative recovery were not different between the two groups. Two patients in their first trimester decided to terminate the pregnancy after appendectomy. One patient in her second trimester experienced preterm labor which was resolved spontaneously. There was no other obstetric adverse outcome.

Conclusion

In the laparoscopy age, appendectomy during pregnancy is safe and not associated with a significantly increased risk of postoperative complication.

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.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis during pregnancy

AIM OF STUDY

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric surgical problem in pregnant patients. As minimally invasive surgery has developed, minimising surgical trauma and improving cosmetic outcomes have led to the development of single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of SPLS for acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between September 2014 and May 2016, 12 pregnant patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis and having single-port laparoscopic appendectomy were included in the study.

RESULTS

The median gestational age at surgery was 16 weeks (6-30 weeks). All operations were completed safely and without vascular or visceral injury. Four patients (33.3%) required conversion to a reduced-port laparoscopic surgery with 3 patients (25%) having a 5 mm port inserted because of perforated appendicitis with drain placement, and 1 patient (8.3%) having a 2-mm needle instrument insertion. Median operation time was 60 min (32-100 min), and a drainage tube was placed in 5 patients (41.7%). Median total length of incision was 2 cm (1.2-2.5 cm). The median time to soft diet initiation and length of stay in the hospital were 1 day (0-9 days) and 5 days (2-11 days), respectively. Two patients (8.0%) developed post-operative complications: One wound site bleeding and two surgical site infections. One case of abortion (8.3%) was noted on the post-operative day 1 and one case of imperforate hymen was noted after delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

SPLS appendectomy is feasible and safe for treating patients with acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

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.

Pregnant patients requiring appendectomy: comparison between open and laparoscopic approaches in NY State

INTRODUCTION

Even though acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical condition encountered during pregnancy, the preferred approach to appendectomy in pregnant patients remains controversial. Current guidelines support laparoscopic appendectomy as the treatment of choice for pregnant women with appendicitis, regardless of trimester. However, recent published data suggests that the laparoscopic approach contributes to higher rates of fetal demise. Our study aims to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy in pregnancy at a statewide population level.

METHODS

ICD-9 codes were used to extract 1006 pregnant patients undergoing appendectomy between 2005 and 2014 from the NY Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database. Surgical outcomes (any complications, 30-day readmission rate, length of stay (LOS)) and obstetrical outcomes (antepartum hemorrhage, preterm delivery, cesarean section, sepsis, chorioamnionitis) were compared between open and laparoscopic appendectomy. Multivariable generalized linear regression models were used to compare different outcomes between two surgical approaches after adjusting for possible confounders.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic cohort (n = 547, 54.4%) had significantly shorter LOS than the open group (median ± IQR: 2.00 ± 2.00 days versus 3.00 ± 2.00 days, p value < 0.0001, ratio = 0.789, 95% CI 0.727-0.856). Patients with complicated appendicitis had longer LOS than those with simple appendicitis (p value < 0.0001, ratio = 1.660, 95% CI 1.501-1.835). Obstetrical outcomes (p value = 0.097, OR 1.254, 95% CI 0.961-1.638), 30-day non-delivery readmission (p value = 0.762, OR 1.117, 95% CI 0.538-2.319), and any complications (p value = 0.753, OR 0.924, 95% CI 0.564-1.517) were not statistically significant between the laparoscopic versus open appendectomy groups. Three cases of fetal demise occurred, all within the laparoscopic appendectomy group.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach resulted in a shorter LOS. Although fetal demise only occurred in the laparoscopic group, these results were not significant (p value = 0.255). Our large population-based study further supports current guidelines that laparoscopic appendectomy may offer benefits over open surgery for pregnant patients in any trimester due to reduced time in the hospital and fetal and maternal outcomes comparable to open appendectomy.

Factores pronóstico asociados a parto prematuro en mujeres sometidas a apendicectomía durante el embarazo en un país de medianos ingresos

Introducción. El objetivo del estudio fue estimar los factores pronóstico asociados con el parto prematuro y otros resultados clínicos en mujeres embarazadas sometidas a apendicectomía en Colombia. Métodos. Se llevó a cabo un estudio retrospectivo de cohorte a partir de las bases de datos administrativos, que incluyó mujeres embarazadas afiliadas al sistema de salud contributivo en Colombia y sometidas a apendicectomía, entre enero de 2013 y noviembre de 2016. Se estimaron la tasa de parto prematuro, la tasa de mortalidad a los 30 días, el ingreso materno a la unidad de cuidados intensivos a 30 días, el reingreso de la madre a los 30 días y el bajo peso al nacer. Se utilizaron regresiones logísticas multivariadas para identificar estos tres factores pronóstico. Resultados. Se incluyeron 1.589 mujeres en el estudio. La edad media fue de 26,43 ± 5,79 años, el 17,94 % de las apendicectomías se practicaron en el tercer trimestre, el 6,10 % fueron apendicectomías laparoscópicas y el 22,03 % requirió drenaje por peritonitis. Las tasas de parto prematuro, mortalidad a 30 días, ingreso a la unidad de cuidados intensivos a 30 días, reingreso a los 30 días y bajo peso al nacer, fueron 12,08 %, 0,13 %, 9,75 %, 16,93 % y 3,34 %, respectivamente. La edad menor de 18 años, la apendicectomía en el tercer trimestre y el drenaje por peritonitis se asociaron con un mayor riesgo de parto prematuro. El índice de comorbilidad de Charlson, la apendicectomía en el tercer trimestre y el drenaje por peritonitis, se asociaron con un mayor ingreso materno a la unidad de cuidados intensivos. Conclusiones. La apendicectomía en el tercer trimestre y la apendicitis complicada, son factores pronóstico asociados a parto prematuro en mujeres colombianas embarazadas sometidas a apendicectomía.

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.

Urgent Laparoscopic Surgeries during the Third Trimester of Pregnancy: A Case Series

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic management of nonobstetric acute abdominal pain in the third trimester of pregnancy remains controversial with limited data regarding procedure safety and feasibility. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility, immediate complications, and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery at an advanced gestational age.

DESIGN

Case-series.

SETTING

Sheba Medical Center, a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Pregnant women who underwent urgent laparoscopic surgery at 27 weeks of gestation and above.

INTERVENTION

Emergent laparoscopic surgery.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. A telephone questionnaire was administered in cases of missing data. Clinical information obtained included detailed medical and obstetric history; preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data; complications; and pregnancy outcomes. Between January 2010 and July 2017, 12 patients underwent emergent laparoscopic surgeries during the third trimester of pregnancy. The gestational age at the time of the surgery ranged between 27 and 38 weeks. All women had singleton pregnancies. Laparoscopic surgeries included 7 appendectomies, 4 adnexal surgeries, and 1 diagnostic laparoscopy. No complications related to the access route for any of the 12 laparoscopic surgeries occurred. The laparoscopic surgical procedure was successfully completed in 11 patients; only 1 laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated acute appendicitis with purulent peritonitis at 30 weeks of gestation was converted to laparotomy because of a limited operative field. Two patients had preterm labor at 35 and 36 weeks of gestation, respectively. None of the women was complicated with intrauterine fetal demise or low Apgar scores.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that urgent laparoscopic surgeries in the third trimester of pregnancy are feasible and can be safely performed with minimal risk for the patient and fetus. Larger prospective studies are required to validate these recommendations.

[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.

Laparoscopic appendectomy during the third trimester: Case presentation and literature review

Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical problem encountered during pregnancy. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is widely accepted as a minimally invasive procedure for acute appendicitis. However, LA during the third trimester is associated with problems, including technical difficulty, risk of preterm delivery, and fetal loss. We successfully managed three cases of LA during the third trimester between 2011 and 2016. None of the cases required conversion to an open procedure, and none of the patients had postoperative complications and/or fetal loss. We reviewed the literature using the PubMED database from 2007 to 2016 to acquire further evidence and identified 6 reports and 17 cases. The conversion rate was 11.8% (2 cases), the complication rate was 6.67% (1 case), and the preterm delivery rate was 20% (3 cases); no fetal loss was observed. Our study and literature review highlights the role of LA as a potentially feasible treatment approach for appendicitis during the third trimester.

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.

Successful ultrasound-guided drainage of an intra-abdominal collection in late pregnancy

Pregnancy complicated by an intra-abdominal collection is uncommon and poses a challenge in the management. We present a case that illustrates successful treatment via ultrasound-guided drainage of a collection associated with a dermoid cyst in a 30 weeks pregnant patient presenting with fever and right-sided abdominal pain. Following treatment, the patient clinically improved rapidly. The drain was removed 3 days later and a repeat ultrasound scan showed no collection.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy

Acute appendicitis (AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Non-operative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient's factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon's skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner (i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.

Laparoscopy in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy for abdominal surgical emergencies

OBJECTIVE

To assess complications and outcomes of pregnancies following laparoscopic abdominal surgery during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective single-center study of 23 cases of laparoscopic surgery in the second or third trimesters of pregnancy between January 2005 and May 2016.

RESULTS

The laparoscopies were performed between 15 and 33 weeks of gestation, a mean of 23 weeks+2 days, with 6 cases in the 3rd trimester. The operations were: 11 cholecystectomies, 6 appendectomies, 1 intestinal occlusion (volvulus on a gastric band), 3 adnexal torsions, 1 ovarian cyst and 1 paratubal cyst with torsion. No secondary laparotomy was required. The postoperative courses were favorable in most cases. However, 3 appendectomies were complicated, one by chorioamnionitis and miscarriage at 20½ weeks of gestation and 2 by right iliac fossa abscesses requiring percutaneous radiological drainage, one of these women delivered a healthy term baby and the other had chorioamnionitis and preterm delivery at 34 weeks, followed by neonatal death.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy can be safely performed for surgical indications in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. In case of abdominal symptoms, a timely diagnosis is required to decide whether or not to operate and imaging should not be withheld particularly in case of suspected appendicitis which has a high risk of complications.

Estimating the risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery using routinely collected NHS data: an observational study

Background

Previous research suggests that non-obstetric surgery is carried out in 1–2% of all pregnancies. However, there is limited evidence quantifying the associated risks. Furthermore, of the evidence available, none relates directly to outcomes in the UK, and there are no current NHS guidelines regarding non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women.

Objectives

To estimate the risk of adverse birth outcomes of pregnancies in which non-obstetric surgery was or was not carried out. To further analyse common procedure groups.

Data Source

Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) maternity data collected between 2002–3 and 2011–12.

Main outcomes

Spontaneous abortion, preterm delivery, maternal death, caesarean delivery, long inpatient stay, stillbirth and low birthweight.

Methods

We utilised HES, an administrative database that includes records of all patient admissions and day cases in all English NHS hospitals. We analysed HES maternity data collected between 2002–3 and 2011–12, and identified pregnancies in which non-obstetric surgery was carried out. We used logistic regression models to determine the adjusted relative risk and attributable risk of non-obstetric surgical procedures for adverse birth outcomes and the number needed to harm.

Results

We identified 6,486,280 pregnancies, in 47,628 of which non-obstetric surgery was carried out. In comparison with pregnancies in which surgery was not carried out, we found that non-obstetric surgery was associated with a higher risk of adverse birth outcomes, although the attributable risk was generally low. We estimated that for every 287 pregnancies in which a surgical operation was carried out there was one additional stillbirth; for every 31 operations there was one additional preterm delivery; for every 25 operations there was one additional caesarean section; for every 50 operations there was one additional long inpatient stay; and for every 39 operations there was one additional low-birthweight baby.

Limitations

We have no means of disentangling the effect of the surgery from the effect of the underlying condition itself. Many spontaneous abortions will not be associated with a hospital admission and, therefore, will not be included in our analysis. A spontaneous abortion may be more likely to be reported if it occurs during the same hospital admission as the procedure, and this could account for the associated increased risk with surgery during pregnancy. There are missing values of key data items to determine parity, gestational age, birthweight and stillbirth.

Conclusions

This is the first study to report the risk of adverse birth outcomes following non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy across NHS hospitals in England. We have no means of disentangling the effect of the surgery from the effect of the underlying condition itself. Our observational study can never attribute a causal relationship between surgery and adverse birth outcomes, and we were unable to determine the risk of not undergoing surgery where surgery was clinically indicated. We have some reservations over associations of risk factors with spontaneous abortion because of potential ascertainment bias. However, we believe that our findings and, in particular, the numbers needed to harm improve on previous research, utilise a more recent and larger data set based on UK practices, and are useful reference points for any discussion of risk with prospective patients. The risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery is relatively low, confirming that surgical procedures during pregnancy are generally safe.

Future work

Further evaluation of the association of non-obstetric surgery and spontaneous abortion. Evaluation of the impact of non-obstetric surgery on the newborn (e.g. neonatal intensive care unit admission, prolonged length of neonatal stay, neonatal death).

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Outcomes After Nonobstetric Surgery in Pregnant Patients: A Nationwide Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes after nonobstetric surgical procedures in pregnant patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 5591 pregnant women who underwent nonobstetric surgical procedures using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database 2008-2012 claims data. Using a propensity score matching procedure, 22,364 nonpregnant women were selected for comparison. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs of postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality associated with pregnancy.

RESULTS

Pregnant women had higher risks of postoperative septicemia (OR=1.75; 95% CI, 1.47-2.07), pneumonia (OR=1.47; 95% CI, 1.01-2.13), urinary tract infection (OR=1.29; 95% CI, 1.08-1.54), and in-hospital mortality (OR=3.94; 95% CI, 2.62-5.92) compared with nonpregnant women. Pregnant women also had longer hospital stays and higher medical expenditures after nonobstetric surgical procedures than controls. Higher rates of postoperative adverse events in pregnant women receiving nonobstetric surgery were noted in all age groups.

CONCLUSION

Surgical patients with pregnancy showed more adverse events, with a risk of in-hospital mortality approximately 4-fold higher after nonobstetric surgery compared with nonpregnant patients. These findings suggest the urgent need to revise the protocols for postoperative care for this population.

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.

Laparoscopic surgery in pregnancy

Each year, roughly 2% of pregnant women will undergo non-obstetrical abdominal surgery. Appendicitis, symptomatic cholelithiasis and adnexal masses are some of the common diagnoses encountered. Pregnancy poses challenges in the diagnosis and surgical management of these conditions for several reasons. Since the 1990’s, laparoscopic surgery has gained popularity and in the past few years has become the standard of care for pregnant women with surgical pathologies. The advantages of laparoscopic surgery include shorter hospital stay, lower rates of wound infection, and decreased time to bowel function. This brief review discusses key points in laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy and highlights studies comparing laparoscopic and open approaches in common surgical conditions during 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.

Abdominal wall hernia and pregnancy: a systematic review

PURPOSE

There is no consensus as to the treatment strategy for abdominal wall hernias in fertile women. This study was undertaken to review the current literature on treatment of abdominal wall hernias in fertile women before or during pregnancy.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken in PubMed and Embase in combination with a cross-reference search of eligible papers.

RESULTS

We included 31 papers of which 23 were case reports. In fertile women undergoing sutured or mesh repair, pain was described in a few patients during the last trimester of a subsequent pregnancy. Emergency surgery of incarcerated hernias in pregnant women, as well as combined hernia repair and cesarean section appears as safe procedures. No major complications were reported following hernia repair before or during pregnancy. The combined procedure of elective cesarean section and abdominal wall hernia repair was reported in 102 patients without major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature on abdominal wall hernia and pregnancy is sparse. Abdominal wall hernia repair with suture or mesh may cause pain in the last trimester of a subsequent pregnancy. Hernia repair in conjunction with cesarean section appear as the optimal treatment of a pregnant patient with a symptomatic abdominal wall hernia.

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.

Laparoscopic accuracy in prediction of appendiceal pathology: oncologic and inflammatory aspects

BACKGROUND

In the prelaparoscopy era, macroscopically normal appendices were routinely resected. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of laparoscopy.

METHODS

A review of 1,899 patients who underwent appendectomy with multivariate analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic and open approaches had similar false-positive rates, false-negative rates, accuracy, and sensitivity. The study population included 17 false-negative cases (11% of all macroscopically normal appendices). Tumors were found in 1.1% of our study population. Female gender (1.9% vs. .5%; odds ratio, 4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 11; P < .005) and appendiceal perforation were independent risk factors for harboring a tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that laparoscopy has diagnostic quality similar to that of the open approach. Until randomized trials evaluate the fate of patients who receive false-negative diagnoses, routine appendectomy is recommended. Special attention should be paid to female patients and to patients with perforations, who have a 4-fold increased risk for harboring a tumor.

Acute appendicitis in the twenty-first century: should we modify the management protocol?

BACKGROUND

Recent data challenge the traditional management of acute appendicitis with early surgical intervention. This study evaluated the impact of timing of appendectomy and other potential risk factors on progression of acute appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

A search of the relevant databases of a tertiary medical center identified 1,604 patients with verified acute appendicitis who underwent appendectomy in 2004-2007. Demographic and clinical data and time from symptom onset to emergency room admission ("patient interval") and from emergency room admission to surgery ("hospital interval") and their combination were analyzed by pathological grade.

RESULTS

On multivariate analyses, independent risk factors for appendiceal perforation were age <20 years (OR = 1.58, 95 % CI 1.07-2.35) or >50 years (OR = 2.84, 95 % CI 1.82-4.45) (relative to 20-50 years), white cell count >10 × 103/mm(3) (OR = 4.45, 95 % CI 2.05-9.67), body temperature >37.8 °C (OR = 2.23, 95 % CI 1.45-3.41), hospital interval >24 h (OR = 2.84, 95 % CI 1.49-5.4), patient interval >48 h (OR = 3.84, 95 % CI 2.35-6.29), and combined interval >48 h (OR = 4.29, 95 % CI 2.2-8.36). No association with perforation was found for the hour of emergency room arrival, hour of operation, surgical approach, or the performance of preoperative imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

In the general population, the risk of advanced pathological grade of appendicitis increases with time. Thus, prompt appendectomy is warranted. Prospective studies of subgroups of perforated and nonperforated appendicitis are needed.

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.

Gasless laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy: evaluation of its role and usefulness

The minimally invasive laparoscopic approach in the surgical treatment of diseases during pregnancy has become progressively more accepted and applied. In an attempt to overcome the potential adverse effects of pneumoperitoneum on the fetus, gasless laparoscopic surgery (GLS) has been developed. This article reviews the evidence available for the role and effectiveness of GLS in pregnancy. A computerized literature search was conducted on Medline, Science Citation Index, Current Contents, Embase, and PubMed databases for English language publications from the first report of GLS in pregnancy in 1995 to June 2012. Eleven case reports or retrospective series were identified. A total of 44 pregnant women underwent GLS for various surgical indications. In all cases, the procedures were carried out without complication, and the women were discharged from hospital with a continuing pregnancy. GLS in pregnancy has comparable outcomes to conventional CO2 laparoscopy, but it is associated with some advantages. Hypercarbia and increased intraperitoneal pressure due to CO2 insufflation are avoided. The use of high-pressure continuous suction may prevent the problems that are potentially associated with intra-abdominal smoke generated by electrosurgery, which can increase the risk of fetal exposure to elevated levels of toxic gases. Because this procedure may be performed under regional anesthesia, avoiding general anesthesia, there is a minimal transplacental passage of anesthetic drugs to the fetus. The surgeon must be expert in advanced laparoscopic procedures.