Endostapler or endoloops for securing the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Swedish national guidelines for diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Differences in the management of this large group of patients has important consequences for the patients and the healthcare system. Controversies regarding the understanding of the natural course of the disease, the utility of new diagnostic methods, and alternative treatments have lead to large variations in practice patterns between centres. These national guidelines present evidence-based recommendations aiming at a uniform, safe and cost-efficient management of this large group of patients.

METHOD

A working group of six experts with broad clinical and research experience was formed. Additional expertise from outside was consulted during the process. A national survey revealed significant variations in the management of patients with suspicion of appendicitis. The evidence provided in published guidelines and reviews were extracted and systematically graded, according to the GRADE methodology. This was supplemented by additional more recent and more directed search of the literature. Patients treated for appendicitis were involved through interviews. The guidelines were reviewed by external experts before the final version was determined.

RESULTS

The guidelines cover an extensive number of issues: pathology, epidemiology, aetiology, natural history, clinical and laboratory diagnosis, diagnostic scoring systems, diagnostic imaging, treatment, nursing care, follow-up, quality registers and quality indicators, among others. Special considerations related to children and pregnant women are covered.

CONCLUSION

These national guidelines present an extensive and thorough review of the current knowledge base related to appendicitis, and provide up-to-date evidence-based recommendations for the management of this large group of patients.

Handmade Loop Versus Hem-o-Lok Clip in Closure of Appendiceal Stump During Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Limited Setting in a Peripheral University Hospital

Background: Today, laparoscopy is frequently used in abdominal emergencies such as acute appendicitis. There are several techniques used to close the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. We aimed to compare the use of handmade loop and Hem-o-lok used to close the appendiceal stump in public hospitals where resources are limited, in terms of surgical outcomes and cost. Methods: Between January 2020 and December 2022, patients for whom handmade loops and Hem-o-loks were used to close the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy in our clinic were included in the study. There were a total of 638 patients (mean age: 33 ± 13.5 years, 325 females and 313 males) in the patient cohort. Demographic and clinical data, duration of surgery, complications, hospital stay, pathology reports, mortality, and cost of supplies were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 308 patients in the handmade loop group (160 females, 148 males, mean age: 33.7 years, range: 18-85 years) and 330 patients in the Hem-o-lok group (166 females, 164 males, mean age: 32.5 years, range: 18-89 years). There was no significant difference between the two groups for American Society of Anesthesiologists score, duration of symptom, hospital stay, intensive care unit stay, preoperative laboratory values, histopathological results, mortality, and morbidity (P > .05). The mean operation time was 48.76 ± 16.16 minutes in the handmade loop group and 40.53 ± 11.63 minutes in the Hem-o-lok group (p = 0.001). In terms of cost, the cost per case of Hem-o-lok group was about 25.8 times as much as the group that used sutures ($31 versus $1.2). Conclusions: Both methods can be used safely in laparoscopic appendectomy. The use of Hem-o-lok has no advantage other than shortening the operation time. However, it is costlier. Especially in peripheral hospitals where resources are limited, closing the appendiceal stump using a handmade loop is an easy, safe, and cost-effective method.

[Acute appendicitis in adults]

Acute appendicitis in adults. Clinical guidelines.

In Pursuit of the Most Cost-Effective Laparoscopic Appendicectomy: A Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

To review the literature and identify the most economical techniques for laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) that do not compromise on patient care.

METHODS

We performed a search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar for papers published between January 2001 and January 2021. The outcomes of the included studies were then grouped by theme of cost analysis, with the main areas of focus being the use of disposable equipment, appendiceal stump closure, and retrieval of the appendix.

RESULTS

After screening a total of 254 search results, 40 studies were included, representing 13 285 patient outcomes, having two main areas of focus: the use of reusable or disposable equipment and the different methods of appendiceal stump closure. Use of disposable instruments has been cost effective in LA in 2 studies. However, use of reusable trocars has reduced cost of procedure by €250 in another study. Appendiceal stump closure using ligature, endoloops or Endoclips had been cost-effective compared to Endostaplers in 25 studies. This can save up to €350. Endoscopic specimen bags are single use and represent further disposable equipment costs. The use of a sterile glove to replace this piece of kit can further provide cost benefit as shown in 2 studies.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendicectomy can be performed in a variety of ways with equivocal patient safety. We present the use of extracorporeal ligature of the appendiceal base, combined with the use of a surgical glove retrieval system as the most economic technique in laparoscopic appendicectomy.

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.

Techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix resection: insights from the ESTES SnapAppy study

INTRODUCTION

Surgically managed appendicitis exhibits great heterogeneity in techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix amputation from its base. It is unclear whether a particular surgical technique provides outcome benefit or reduces complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We undertook a pre-specified subgroup analysis of all patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at index admission during SnapAppy (ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT04365491). We collected routine, anonymized observational data regarding surgical technique, patient demographics and indices of disease severity, without change to clinical care pathway or usual surgeon preference. Outcome measures of interest were the incidence of complications, unplanned reoperation, readmission, admission to the ICU, death, hospital length of stay, and procedure duration. We used Poisson regression models with robust standard errors to calculate incident rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Three-thousand seven hundred sixty-eight consecutive adult patients, included from 71 centers in 14 countries, were followed up from date of admission for 90 days. The mesoappendix was divided hemostatically using electrocautery in 1564(69.4%) and an energy device in 688(30.5%). The appendix was amputated by division of its base between looped ligatures in 1379(37.0%), with a stapler in 1421(38.1%) and between clips in 929(24.9%). The technique for securely dividing the appendix at its base in acutely inflamed (AAST Grade 1) appendicitis was equally divided between division between looped ligatures, clips and stapled transection. However, the technique used differed in complicated appendicitis (AAST Grade 2 +) compared with uncomplicated (Grade 1), with a shift toward transection of the appendix base by stapler (58% vs. 38%; p < 0.001). While no statistical difference in outcomes could be detected between different techniques for division of appendix base, decreased risk of any [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.58 (0.41-0.82), p = 0.002] and severe [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.33 (0.11-0.96), p = 0.045] complications could be detected when using energy devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Safe mesoappendix transection and appendix resection are accomplished using heterogeneous techniques. Technique selection for both mesoappendix transection and appendix resection correlates with AAST grade. Higher grade led to more ultrasonic tissue transection and stapled appendix resection. Higher AAST appendicitis grade also correlated with infection-related complication occurrence. Despite the overall well-tolerated heterogeneity of approaches to acute appendicitis, increasing disease acuity or complexity appears to encourage homogeneity of intraoperative surgical technique toward advanced adjuncts.

Validation of appendiceal stump invagination in laparoscopic appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

There are various methods for appendiceal stump dissection, but the necessity for stump invagination remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of appendiceal stump invagination in patients with acute appendicitis after laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

We enrolled 327 patients with acute appendicitis who underwent LA between 2012 and 2020. Perioperative variables and surgical outcomes were analyzed between the invagination of the appendiceal stump and noninvagination groups. Propensity score-matched analysis (PSM) was performed.

RESULTS

More patients experienced severe inflammation and severe intra-abdominal contamination in the noninvagination group than in the invagination group. Patients in the noninvagination group had an older age, higher body mass index, and poorer American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status than the invagination group. Severe inflammation in the noninvagination group was associated with longer hospital stays and poorer postoperative complications than in the invagination group. PSM analysis was performed to minimize bias in the two groups. After PSM analysis, there were no significant differences in surgical site infection, postoperative intra-abdominal abscess, Clavien-Dindo class ≥IIIa, or postoperative stay between the two groups. During the follow-up period, the postoperative adhesive ileus was not significantly different between the invagination and noninvagination groups.

CONCLUSION

Invagination of the appendiceal stump during LA is not necessary to prevent short- and long-term complications. Even in cases dissected using a laparoscopic endostapler, the appendiceal stump per se is not related to postoperative adhesive ileus.

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.

Diffuse Appendicular Peritonitis: Laparoscopic vs Open Access — Viewpoint From Aside

The perforative acute appendicitis with the development of diffuse peritonitis increases the incidence of postoperative complications to 47%, and mortality to 3%. Mortality in the case of the development of diffuse purulent peritonitis makes 4.5-58%, and it can exceed 70% in severe forms of diffuse peritonitis with the development of infectious-toxic shock and multiple organ failure. National Clinical Guidelines for acute appendicitis with diffuse peritonitis allow for appendectomy from both the median and laparoscopic access in the absence of general contraindications to the creation of pneumoperitoneum. However, despite the proven advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy, there are opponents of its use in diffuse forms of appendicular peritonitis. An increased number of postoperative abscesses with a minimally invasive approach has been reported in literature; however, recent randomized studies refute this fact. There is also evidence that the laparoscopic method for appendicular peritonitis often leads to a lengthening of the operation time and higher operating costs, but at the same time there is a decrease in postoperative pain syndrome, a reduction in the length of inpatient treatment and early social and labor rehabilitation, which leads to an overall decrease in hospital costs. Thus, to date, there is no generally accepted opinion about the advisability of laparoscopic access for appendicular peritonitis. At the moment, the presence of diffuse peritonitis is the most common intraoperative reason for refusing a minimally invasive surgical treatment. However, there is a tendency to trying to standardize indications and contraindications, which was the objective of our literature review.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy without the use of disposable materials - a low-cost alternative - 1,552 cases operated in 20 years

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic appendectomy does not have a single protocol on its technical systematization, access routes, and use of energy and staplers. The cost of disposable materials can prevent its widespread use. Alternatives to decrease cost can help disseminate the laparoscopic access to appendectomy.

OBJECTIVE

to introduce a low-cost laparoscopic appendectomy method with good aesthetic results through the location of incisions; to show its viability through its application in 1,552 cases of laparoscopic appendectomy operated between 2000 and 2019 with three portals and very low-cost regarding materials used.

METHODS

we applied three punctures - an umbilical one for the camera (5 or 10mm in diameter), a 10mm puncture in the right iliac fossa, and one 5mm puncture in the left iliac fossa. The materials used were permanent use trocars, grasping forceps, hook, scissors, and needle holder, without the need for any disposable device.

RESULTS

1.552 patients were operated between 2000 and 2019, 56.2% being female, mean age 32.66 years (9-93), average hospital stay of 1.74 days (1-10), and median of 1.2 days.

CONCLUSION

the technique we describe uses three metallic trocars and four permanent instruments, in addition to a single cotton suture. It is, therefore, a very low-cost laparoscopic procedure. Its application has shown good results and low morbidity, which may become the preferred indication for laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Is the use of endoloops safe and efficient for the closure of the appendicular stump in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis?

INTRODUCTION

There is still controversy regarding the ideal technique to close the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficiency of the use of an endoloop (EL) and endostapler (ES) in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing LA from February 2013 to December 2019. Acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis were analysed separately, establishing two groups according to the stump closure technique: EL or ES. Seven hundred-nine patients were included (535 uncomplicated and 174 complicated). In uncomplicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 447 of the patients (83.55%) and an ES was used in 88 patients (16.45%). In complicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 85 patients (48.85%) and an ES was used in 89 patients (51.15%). An analysis of effectiveness and a cost analysis of each technique were performed.

RESULTS

In uncomplicated appendicitis, we found no differences with respect to global complications, although there were significant differences in the total mean hospital stay (EL group 1.55 (SD 1.48) days; ES group 2.21 (SD 1.69) days; p = 0.046). This meant a savings of 514.12€ per patient using the EL p < 0.001). In complicated appendicitis, the reoperations classified as Clavien-Dindo IIIB in the EL group (6.4%) were greater than in the ES group (0%) (p = 0.012), although the rate of postoperative abscesses (p = 0.788) and the mean volume of abscesses (p = 0.891) were similar.

CONCLUSION

The systematic use of an EL could reduce costs in uncomplicated appendicitis, while in complicated cases, both options are valid. Prospective studies with a greater number of patients are needed to observe differences in postoperative complications.

Factors affecting the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy: A single center study

AIM

This study aimed to explore factors may affect the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

The data of 636 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between July 2016 and July 2019 in Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into group A (hospital stay ≤3 days, 348 patients) and group B (hospital stay >3 days, 288 patients) according to their hospital stay.Sex, age, disease onset time(time from onset to admission), nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, peritonitis, comorbidities, and history of appendicitis; preoperative body temperature (T), white blood cell (WBC) count, percentage of neutrophilic granulocytes, and preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) level; time from diagnosis to surgery. appendix diameter, appendicolith, and ascites in ultrasound or CT; surgical time(the surgery start time was the time of skin incision, and the end time was the time the anesthesia intubation was removed), intraoperative blood loss (the volume of blood infiltrating into a gauze was calculated by weighing the gauze infiltrated with water and calculating the volume of water), intraoperative adhesions or effusions, and stump closure methods, convert to open appendectomy, appendix pathology(perforated or gangrenous appendicitis were defined as complicated appendicitis and simple or suppurative appendicitis were defined as uncomplicated appendicitis) and antibiotic treatment schemes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were detected between group A and group B in age (37.10 ± 13.52y vs 42.94 ± 15.57y, P<0.01), disease onset time (21.36 ± 16.56 h vs 32.52 ± 27.99 h, P <0.01), time from diagnosis to surgery (8.63 ± 7.29 h vs 10.70 ± 8.47 h, P<0.01); surgical time(64.09 ± 17.24 min vs 86.19 ± 39.96 min, P < 0.01); peritonitis(52.9% vs 74%, P < 0.01), comorbidities (12.4% vs 20.5%, P < 0.01), appendicolith (27.6% vs 41.7%, P < 0.01), ascites before the surgery(13.8% vs 22.9%, P < 0.01), intraoperative adhesions or effusions(56% vs 80.2%, P < 0.01); preoperative temperature (37.11 ± 0.64°C vs 37.54 ± 0.90°C, P < 0.01); preoperative WBC count (13.06 ± 3.39 × 109/L vs 14.21 ± 4.54 × 109/L, P = 0.04);preoperative CRP level(18.99 ± 31.72 mg/L vs 32.46 ± 46.68 mg/L, P < 0.01); appendix diameter(10.22 ± 2.59 mm vs 11.26 ± 3.23 mm, P < 0.01); intraoperative blood loss (9.36 ± 7.29 mL vs 13.74 ± 13.49 mL, P < 0.01); using Hem-o-lok for stump closure(30.7% vs 38.5%, P = 0.04); complicated appendicitis (9.5% vs 45.8%, P < 0.01); and using ertapenem for antibiotic treatment after the surgery(4.3% vs 21.5%, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age (OR = 1.021; 95%CI = 1.007-1.036), peritonitis (OR = 1.603; 95% CI = 1.062-2.419), preoperative WBC count (OR = 1.084; 95% CI = 1.025-1.046), preoperative CRP level (OR = 1.010; 95% CI = 1.005-1.015), time from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.043; 95% CI = 1.015-1.072), appendicolith (OR = 1.852; 95% CI = 1.222-2.807), complicated appendicitis (OR = 3.536; 95% CI = 2.132-5.863), surgical time (OR = 1.025; 95% CI = 1.016-1.034), use of Hem-o-lok for stump closure (OR = 1.894; 95% CI = 1.257-2.852), and use of ertapenem for antibiotic treatment (OR = 3.076; 95% CI = 1.483-6.378) were the risk factors for a prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient with appendicitis was older and had peritonitis, higher preoperative WBC count or CRP level, longer time from diagnosis to surgery, appendicolith, and complicated appendicitis, predicting a prolonged hospital stay. Shorter surgical time and the use of silk ligation for stump closure and cephalosporins + metronidazole for antibiotic treatment might be better choices to obtain a shorter hospital stay.

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.

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.

Morbidity after negative appendectomy: a single-centre experience on 627 cases

INTRODUCTION

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of abdominal pain in emergency departments worldwide. Despite the improvement in radiological and clinical investigations, negative appendectomy remains a debated topic as well as the optimal strategy for use in cases demonstrating a nonpathological appendix during a procedure for suspected appendicitis. The aim of the present study was thus to analyse clinical outcomes of histologically NA to better elucidate the burden associated with a potentially avoidable procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a prospectively collected database of all patients undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis. Patients who underwent an elective appendectomy or an appendectomy for other causes than suspected appendicitis or even an appendectomy during the course of another procedure were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS

Data of 627 patients undergoing an emergency procedure for suspected appendectomy were registered. Of the 627 patients, 533 (85%) were found to have acute appendicitis (378 uncomplicated, 155 severe), while the NA rate was 14.9%. A preoperative CT scan was performed in 148 patients (23.6%), an ultrasound evaluation was conducted in 427 patients (68.1%), and 127 patients (20.3%) underwent no imaging prior to surgical intervention. The large majority of procedures was performed laparoscopically (77.7%) and the median procedure duration was 70 min (range 17-270 min). The cumulative conversion rate (both AA and NA) was 5.7%. Leucocytes were significantly lower in cases of NA, while C-reactive protein (CRP) level was found to be increased fourfold in cases of severe versus uncomplicated appendicitis and NA. An increased use of endoloop in appendiceal stump closure was noted in the NA group (88.3% loop vs. 11.7% stapler), while endostapler usage increased in the severe appendicitis group up to 38.1%. Most patients with NA underwent only preoperative ultrasound (71.3%), with just 8.5% of patients in this group having a CT scan before surgery. Ultrasound sensivity was 0.648 and specificity was 0.438. For CT scan, sensivity was 0.949 and specificity was 0.625. LOS in the NA patient group was comparable to that of patients affected by uncomplicated appendicitis, while patients with severe appendicitis experienced a 2-day-longer median recovery. Complications were significantly higher in the severe appendicitis group but comparable in the other two groups. Surgical site infections were the most frequently reported complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Young women are particularly at risk for NA. Increasing the use of preoperative CT and incorporating imaging into the overall assessment of a patient seems to be actually the only way to reduce the incidence of NA without increasing the rates of perforation. Considering the relatively high morbidity after an NA procedure, every surgeon must carefully consider the risk-benefit balance prior to performing an appendectomy during diagnostic laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis showing a macroscopically noninflamed appendix.

Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

METHODS

This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

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.

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.

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.

Absorbable polymeric surgical clips for appendicular stump closure: A randomized control trial of laparoscopic appendectomy with lapro-clips

A randomized control trial was performed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of absorbable polymeric clips for appendicular stump closure in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). Patients were randomly enrolled into an experimental group (ligation of the appendicular base with Lapro-Clips, L-C group) or control group (ligation of the appendicular base with Hem-o-lok Clips, H-C group). We identified 1,100 patients who underwent LA between April 1, 2012 and February 3, 2015. Overall, 99 patients (9.0%, 99/1,100) developed a complication following LA (47 [8.5%] in the L-C group and 52 [9.5%] in the H-C group (P = 0.598). No statistically significant differences were observed in intra-abdominal abscesses, stump leakage, superficial wound infections, post-operative abdominal pain, overall adverse events, or the duration of the operations and hospital stays between the groups (all p > 0.05). Adverse risk factors associated with the use of absorbable clips in LA included body mass index ≥ 27.5 kg/m2, diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists degree ≥ III, gangrenous appendicitis, severe inflammation of the appendix base, appendix perforation, and the absence of peritoneal drainage. The results indicate that the Lapro-Clip is a safe and effective device for closing the appendicular stump in LA in select patients with appendicitis.

Single-incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy for acute Appendicitis using a 10-mm Laparoscope and the Glove Port Technique

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the single incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) using existing instruments, the 10-mm laparoscope, and glove port technique.

METHODS

SILA was performed on 16 patients (8 male cases, 8 female cases) between June 2012 and September 2015. A 20-mm incision was made in the umbilicus and a wound retractor was placed. A 10-mm trocar for the laparoscope and two 5-mm trocars were fixed to the three fingers of the latex gloves and it was attached to the wound retractor. Another thin forceps were inserted from right low abdomen.

RESULTS

Average age of patients was 32.6 ± 17.7 years. Preoperative average white blood cell was 13,325 ± 4,584 /mm³, and average CRP was 1.81 ± 3.70 mg/dL. Preoperative body temperature was 36.8 ± 0.5°C. The mean appendix size was 9.6 ± 2.3 mm and none of the patients had an abscess on preoperative CT. The CT also revealed a fecal pellet in 5/16 (31%) of patients. Mean operation time was 66.4 ± 25.4 minutes, and minimal intraoperative bleeding was observed in all patients. Average hospital stay was 5.3 ± 1.9 days and none of the patients had complications.

CONCLUSION

SILA using the 10-mm laparoscope and glove port technique may be a safe and feasible operation for mild to moderate appendicitis.

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.

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.

Three port laparoscopic appendectomy technique with low cost and aesthetic advantage

INTRODUCTION

Despite dating more than 30 years after the first laparoscopic appendectomy, ileocecal appendix resection is still performed by laparotomy in more than 90% of cases, in our country.

AIM

To describe a technique for laparoscopic removal of the ileocecal appendix with three portals, at low cost and very good aesthetic appearance.

TECHNIQUE

Three incisions, one umbilical and two suprapubic are made; permanent material used comprises: grasping forceps, hook, scissors, needle holders, three metal trocars and four other usual instruments, and a single strand of cotton. There is no need to use of operative extractors bags, clips, endoloops, staples or bipolar or harmonic energy instruments. Allows triangulation and instrumentation in the conventional manner.

CONCLUSION

The proposed technique is safe and reproducible, easily teachable, at very low cost and can be applied in general hospitals with conventional laparoscopic equipment.