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

Clinical significance of appendicoliths in conservative treatment of acute complicated appendicitis patients with peri-appendiceal abscess: a single-center retrospective study

Background

This study aimed to analyze the clinical data of patients who received conservative treatment for acute complicated appendicitis with peri-appendiceal abscess, identify factors influencing the success rate, and improve treatment strategies.

Methods

The clinical data of acute complicated appendicitis patients with peri-appendiceal abscess who received conservative treatment at the Department of Emergency Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, from January 2016 to March 2023, were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

A total of 80 patients were included in our study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the outcomes of ultrasound-guided drainage: The Drainage group (n=28) and the Antibiotic group (n=52). The baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. In the Antibiotic group, the surgery rate was 30.4% for patients with an appendicolith and 6.9% for those without. In the Drainage group, the surgery rate was 33.3% for patients with an appendicolith and 27.3% for those without. The presence of an appendicolith significantly correlated with the need for surgery in the Antibiotic group (P=0.026), but not in the Drainage group (P=0.771). For patients who underwent surgery, the incidence of surgical site infections did not differ significantly (P=0.656), and the median length of postoperative hospital stay was similar between the groups (4.0 days vs. 3.0 days, P=0.337).

Conclusion

The presence of an appendicolith is a risk factor for the failure of antibiotic therapy alone in acute complicated appendicitis patients with peri-appendiceal abscess. However, it does not affect the surgical rate in those who underwent successful drainage.

Clinical significance of peri-appendiceal abscess and phlegmon in acute complicated appendicitis patients undergoing emergency appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Although antibiotic therapy has become the primary treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis, the management of acute complicated appendicitis necessitates careful consideration of various treatment options.

AIM

To analyze the clinical data of patients who underwent emergency appendectomy for acute complicated appendicitis with peri-appendiceal abscess or phlegmon, identify factors influencing the postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS), and improve treatment strategies.

METHODS

The clinical data of acute complicated appendicitis patients with peri-appendiceal abscess or phlegmon who underwent emergency appendectomy at The Department of Emergency Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University from January 2016 to March 2023 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 234 patients were included in our study. The duration of symptoms and the presence of an appendicolith were significantly correlated with the occurrence of peri-appendiceal abscess in patients with acute complicated appendicitis (P < 0.001 and P = 0.015, respectively). Patients with symptoms lasting longer than 72 h had a significantly longer postoperative LOS compared to those with symptoms lasting 72 h or less [hazard ratio (HR), 1.208; 95%CI: 1.107-1.319; P < 0.001]. Additionally, patients with peri-appendiceal abscesses had a significantly longer postoperative LOS compared to those with phlegmon (HR, 1.217; 95%CI: 1.095-1.352; P < 0.001). The patients with peri-appendiceal abscesses were divided into two groups based on the median size of the abscess: Those with abscesses smaller than 5.0 cm (n = 69) and those with abscesses 5.0 cm or larger (n = 82). Patients with peri-appendiceal abscesses measuring 5.0 cm or larger had a significantly longer postoperative LOS than those with abscesses smaller than 5.0 cm (P = 0.038).

CONCLUSION

The duration of symptoms and the presence of an appendicolith are significant risk factors for the formation of peri-appendiceal abscesses in patients with acute complicated appendicitis. Patients with peri-appendiceal abscesses experience a significantly longer postoperative LOS compared to those with peri-appendiceal phlegmon.

Association between body composition and incisional surgical site infection after laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis

PURPOSE

Surgical site infection (SSI) is common after laparoscopic appendectomy, resulting in prolonged hospital stay and increased costs. This study examined the relationship between body composition parameters and risk of incisional SSI in patients with complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

We included 411 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis at a single institution between March 2015 and October 2023. Body composition parameters were derived from preoperative computed tomography (CT). A nomogram was constructed based on the independent predictors of incisional SSI.

RESULTS

Overall, 45 (10.9%) patients developed incisional SSI. Visceral fat area (VFA) was independently associated with risk of incisional SSI (hazard ratio 1.015, 95% confidence interval 1.010-1.020, P < 0.001). A nomogram integrating VFA and two other independent predictors (diabetes and conversion) demonstrated high discriminative (area under the curve = 0.793) and calibration abilities.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-derived VFA could be a valuable predictor of incisional SSI in patients with complicated appendicitis undergoing laparoscopic surgery. A VFA-based nomogram may help in identifying patients at high risk of SSI.

Risk Factors for Postoperative Infections Following Appendectomy of Complicated Appendicitis: A Meta-analysis and Retrospective Single-institutional Study

Patients with complicated appendicitis have an increased risk for postoperative infections. Potential risk factors for postoperative infections through a meta-analysis and retrospective chart review are discussed. A meta-analysis consisting of 35 studies analyzing complicated appendicitis treated with an appendectomy noting at least 1 postoperative infection was performed. A retrospective review was then conducted in patients diagnosed with complicated appendicitis after appendectomy. Of 5326 patients in total, 15.4% developed postoperative infections. Laparoscopic surgery and perioperative hyperoxygenation were found to be protective factors for the development of infection. Retrospectively, 53.2% of patients presented with complicated appendicitis. Patients with complicated appendicitis were more likely to be older in age and have an increased length of stay. Patient demographics, operative time, and comorbid status had no effect on postoperative infection or readmission rate. Physicians should strongly consider minimally invasive techniques to treat all cases of complicated appendicitis irrespective of comorbidities, age, sex, or body mass index.

Colonoscopic titanium clipping to Maddress appendiceal stump leakage: a case report

The incidence of appendiceal stump leakage (ASL) is extremely low and heterogeneous, which has been reported to be approximately 0.5%-1.0%. It is a catastrophic complication with high mortality rate despite its low morbidity. Once it occurs, it will put the doctor in a passive position because dealing with the leakage is much more cumbersome than appendectomy. We extensively reviewed the literature on ASL, focusing on the management and prognosis. Unsurprisingly, all of the physicians advocated extended resection, which apparently gave them sufficient confidence. However, partial cecum resection, cecostomy, or terminal ileectomy is extremely invasive and destructive. So, the patients had to experience great mental and physical trauma, longer hospital stays, higher rates of wound infection, more costs, and even a third surgery. Therefore, are there any better approaches for ASL? In this article, we report a case of ASL who successfully underwent endoscopic treatment. A 70-year-old male was admitted with gangrenous perforated appendicitis with a large iliopsoas abscess. Appendectomy, iliopsoas abscess debridement and sufficient drainage, appendicular stump repair and closure, and terminal ileostomy were performed. Three months later, the patient was readmitted and the stoma reversal was performed as scheduled. Seven days later, ASL was found when a liquid diet was applied routinely due to right lower quadrant pain and low fever. Finally, with the periappendiceal abscess completely drained, we clamped the appendiceal orifice with five titanium clips under an electronic colonoscope, which eventually sealed the leakage and avoided extended resection.

Challenges to implement laparoscopic appendectomy as the first-line treatment for acute appendicitis: a fifteen-year experience in a tertiary hospital in Brazil

BACKGROUND

the barriers to implement emergency laparoscopy in public teaching hospitals involve issues such as resident learning curves and resource costs and availability. This study was designed to describe the issues facing the implementation of laparoscopic approach for acute appendicitis over 15 years in a single academic center in Brazil.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

retrospective study of patients undergoing emergency appendectomy from 2004 to 2018. Clinical data were compared to four major actions implemented in the emergency surgical service: minimally invasive surgery training for residents (2007), laparoscopic stump closure using metal clips (2008), 24/7 availability of laparoscopic instruments for emergency surgeries (2010), and third-party contract for maintenance of the laparoscopic instruments and implementation of polymeric clips for stump closure (2013). We evaluated the increase in laparoscopic appendectomy after the implementation of those major changes.

RESULTS

we identified 1168 appendectomies during the study period, of which 691 (59%), 465 (40%), and 12 (1%) were open, laparoscopic, and converted, respectively. The implementation of the major changes since 2004 resulted in an increase of laparoscopic appendectomies from 11% in 2007 to 80% in 2016. These actions were decisive in the widespread use of laparoscopy for acute appendicitis (p<0.001). The standardization of the hem-o-lok clip in the treatment of the appendiceal stump made the procedure more feasible, reducing the surgical time using laparoscopic access and increasing the team's adherence, so that this became the route of choice in about 85% of cases in the period from 2014 to 2018, 80% performed by 3rd year resident physicians. No intraoperative complications were noted related to laparoscopic access, even in more complicated appendicitis. There was no mortality reported, no reoperations or readmissions to hospital during a 30-day postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

the development of a feasible, reproducible, and safe technical standardization, associated with continuous cost optimization, are the cornerstones for a consistent and viable change in the current practice for appendectomies in middle and lower-income countries.

Intra and Postoperative Advantages of Laparoscopy in the Treatment of Complicated Appendicitis

Aim: To determine and define the advantages of the laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of complicated appendicitis by comparing it with the open appendectomy. Material and Methods: In this prospective interventional clinical study we compared the intraoperative data and the postoperative outcome of 77 patients presented with complicated appendicitis, operated with open and laparoscopic appendectomy within a period of 20 months. One surgeon performed all of the laparoscopic procedures and two other senior surgeons performed the open procedures. Results: Operative time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.033). Conversion rate was 2.3%. Overall postoperative morbidity was 25.97%. There was one operative revision due to postoperative small bowel obstruction in the laparoscopic group. Appendicular stump leakage occurred in one patient in the open group. One intra-abdominal abscess occurred in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.38). Wound infection occurred only in the open group (p = 0.018). Length of stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.0052). One patient from the laparoscopic group was readmitted. Conclusions: Laparoscopy is a reliable method in the treatment of complicated appendicitis. It offers a shorter operative time, low conversion rate, an acceptable rate of major postoperative complications and a shorter length of stay.

Periappendiceal fluid collection on preoperative computed tomography can be an indication for interval appendectomy: a retrospective study

Background

The treatment strategies for acute appendicitis, such as emergency appendectomy (EA), interval appendectomy (IA), and repeating nonoperative management (NOM), are controversial. In this study, we examined the preoperative factors that can be used to distinguish which patients should undergo IA.

Methods

We retrospectively identified 902 patients who underwent surgery for appendicitis in our hospital from January 2010 to December 2021. Of these patients, 776 were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups: those with a periappendiceal fluid collection (PAFC) on preoperative computed tomography (PAFC-positive group, n = 170) and those without a PAFC (PAFC-negative group, n = 606). In each group, we compared patients who underwent EA and IA.

Results

In the PAFC-positive group, patients who underwent EA had a significantly higher postoperative complication rate than those who underwent IA (40.5% vs. 24.0%, p = 0.037). In the multivariate analysis, only the presence of PAFC was significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio, 7.11; 95% confidence interval, 2.73–18.60; p < 0.001). The presence of PAFC alone was not significantly associated with an increased risk of IA or NOM failure (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.19–11.7; p = 0.71). The rate of neoplasia on pathologic examination was significantly higher in the PAFC-positive than PAFC-negative group (7.6% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001); the rate of carcinoma was also higher in the PAFC-positive group (2.4% vs. 0.17%, p = 0.02).

Conclusions

The presence of PAFC on preoperative computed tomography was found to be a risk factor for postoperative complications but not IA or NOM failure. It was also correlated with neoplasia as the etiology of appendicitis. Therefore, PAFC positivity is useful as an indication for IA.

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.

[Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic approach for widespread appendicular peritonitis]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze treatment outcomes in patients with acute appendicitis complicated by widespread peritonitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 165 patients acute appendicitis complicated by widespread peritonitis. Inclusion criteria: acute appendicitis complicated by widespread peritonitis MIP grade 1-2 in reactive or toxic phase (grading system by Simonyan K.S.), abdominal cavity index ≤16. Exclusion criteria: MIP grade 3, terminal phase, abdominal cavity index ≥17.

RESULTS

Analysis of postoperative data revealed no correlation between surgical approach and incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses and infiltrates. In the main group, intra-abdominal abscesses occurred in 4.9% of patients (n=5), infiltrates - 12.8% (n=13). In the control group, these parameters were 4.6% (n=2) and 18.2% (n=8), respectively. We have developed and introduced into clinical practice a differentiated approach to surgical treatment of widespread appendicular peritonitis based on laparoscopic data. Abdominal cavity was intraoperatively assessed. The proposed method included 5 criteria with establishment of appropriate points (min 3, max 14). In case of total score 3-8, laparoscopic approach was preferred. Overall score 9-11 required laparoscopic surgery with subsequent elective repeated laparoscopy, ≥12 scores - intraoperative conversion and open surgery. Thus, subject to the rules of surgical intervention, the number of intra-abdominal complications between laparoscopic and open methods is equalized.

CONCLUSION

The developed differentiated surgical strategy for patients with appendicular peritonitis is effective and reduces the incidence of wound infection, extra-abdominal complications, and hospital-stay, as well as contributes to early rehabilitation of patients.

Adult appendicitis: Clinical practice guidelines from the French Society of Digestive Surgery and the Society of Abdominal and Digestive Imaging

INTRODUCTION

The French Society of Digestive Surgery (SFCD) and the Society of Abdominal and Digestive Imaging (SIAD) have collaborated to propose recommendations for clinical practice in the management of adult appendicitis.

METHODS

An analysis of the literature was carried out according to the methodology of the French National Authority for Health (HAS). A selection was performed from collected references and then a manual review of the references listed in the selected articles was made in search of additional relevant articles. The research was limited to articles whose language of publication was English or French. Articles focusing on the pediatric population were excluded. Based on the literature review, the working group proposed recommendations whenever possible. These recommendations were reviewed and approved by a committee of experts.

RESULTS

Recommendations about appendicitis in adult patients were proposed with regard to clinical, laboratory and radiological diagnostic modalities, treatment strategy for uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis, surgical technique, and specificities in the case of macroscopically healthy appendix, terminal ileitis and appendicitis in the elderly and in pregnant women.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations for clinical practice may be useful to the surgeon in optimizing the management of acute appendicitis in adults.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in complicated appendicitis in children: a single center study

Background

Acute complicated appendicitis is a common abdominal emergency in children. Unlike simple appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy has not been considered yet the first choice in management of complicated appendicitis. This prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at Pediatric Surgery Department, Zagazig University Hospitals, Egypt, during the period from December 2018 to August 2019. The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of laparoscopic appendectomy in such cases compared to open appendectomy.

Results

Sixty patients were included in the study, divided randomly into 2 equal groups: laparoscopic and open appendectomy groups. The mean operative time was significantly longer with laparoscopic appendectomy than open appendectomy, 85 vs. 61 min, respectively (p < 0.001**). The time taken to start oral intake was significantly shorter with laparoscopic appendectomy than open appendectomy, 1.9 vs. 2.73 days, respectively (p = 0.025*). The mean hospital stay was significantly lower with laparoscopic appendectomy than open appendectomy, 4.23 vs. 5.13, respectively (p = 0.044*). There were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding wound infection, occurrence of postoperative ileus, intraperitoneal collection, or readmission.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe, feasible, and effective procedure in the management of complicated appendicitis in children, with no evidence of any increase in the postoperative complications.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial nonoperative management versus emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for acute complicated appendicitis

Background

The evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management is growing. However, the best treatment strategy for acute complicated appendicitis remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis patients. This study sought to determine the most cost-effective strategy from the health care-payer’s perspective.

Methods

The primary outcome was an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) using nonoperative management with or without interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) as the intervention compared with operative management with emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (ELA) alone as the control. Model variables were abstracted from a literature review, and from data obtained from the hospital records of Tochigi Medical Center. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an ICER. We constructed a Markov model to compare treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis in otherwise-healthy adults, over a time horizon of a single year. Uncertainty surrounding model parameters was assessed via one-way- and probabilistic-sensitivity analyses. Threshold analysis was performed using the willingness-to-pay threshold set at the World Health Organization’s criterion of $107,690.

Results

Three meta-analysis were included in our analysis. Operative management cost $6075 per patient. Nonoperative management with interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) cost $984 more than operative management and produced only 0.005 more QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $182,587. Nonoperative management without ILA cost $235 more than operative management, and also yielded only 0.005 additional QALYs resulting in an ICER of $45,123 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 1000 draws resulted in average ICER of $172,992 in nonoperative management with ILA and $462,843 in Nonoperative management without ILA. The threshold analysis demonstrated that regardless of willingness-to-pay, nonoperative management without ILA would not be most cost-effective strategy.

Conclusions

Nonoperative management with ILA and Nonoperative management without ILA were not cost-effective strategies compared with operative management to treat complicated appendicitis. Based on our findings, operative management remains the standard of care and nonoperative management would be reconsidered as a treatment option in complicated appendicitis from economic perspective.

Laparoscopic versus open approach for diffuse peritonitis from appendicitis ethiology: a subgroup analysis from the Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis (PIPAS) study

Diffuse peritonitis represents a life-threatening complication of acute appendicitis (AA). Whether laparoscopy is a safe procedure and presents similar results compared with laparotomy in case of complicated AA is still a matter of debate. The objective of this study is to compare laparoscopic (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) for the management of diffuse peritonitis caused by AA. This is a prospective multicenter cohort study, including 223 patients with diffuse peritonitis from perforated AA, enrolled in the Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis (PIPAS) study from February to May 2018. Two groups were created: LA = 78 patients, mean age 42.51 ± 22.14 years and OA = 145 patients, mean age 38.44 ± 20.95 years. LA was employed in 34.98% of cases. There was no statically significant difference between LA and OA groups in terms of intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative peritonitis, rate of reoperation, and mortality. The wound infection rate was higher in the OA group (OR 21.63; 95% CI 3.46-895.47; P = 0.00). The mean postoperative hospital stay in the LA group was shorter than in the OA group (6.40 ± 4.29 days versus 7.8 ± 5.30 days; P = 0.032). Although LA was only used in one-third of cases, it is a safe procedure and should be considered in the management of patients with diffuse peritonitis caused by AA, respecting its indications.

A simple classification of peritoneal contamination in perforated appendicitis predicts surgery-related complications

AIM

Perforated appendicitis has poorer clinical outcomes compared to non-perforated appendicitis. However, accurate outcome comparisons in research and clinical audits are challenged by its wide spectrum of manifestation. Previous attempts at the classification of severity have been complex and difficult to reproduce. In our study, we used another institution's (Jones et al., TX, USA) previously described simple classification system of peritoneal contamination and examined its usefulness in predicting outcomes.

METHODS

With ethical approval, we retrospectively reviewed the records of all paediatric patients operated at our institution for perforated appendicitis from 2016 to 2017. Patient demographics, intra-operative and histological findings, post-operative outcomes and length of stay were collected. Patients were categorised into group 1 (purulence in right lower quadrant only) and group 2 (contamination in two or more quadrants). Post-operative complications were defined as procedure-related (e.g. post-operative ileus, intra-abdominal abscess, visceral injury) and non-procedure-related (e.g. bronchospasm). Statistical analysis using χ² tests for categorical data and Mann-Whitney U-tests for non-parametric continuous variables was performed, with a significance of P < 0.05.

RESULTS

There were 134 eligible patients. We excluded 19 with incomplete data, leaving 115 for analysis, of which 69 (60%) were in group 2. Those in group 2 had a longer stay (P = 0.005) and more post-operative complications (P = 0.001), particularly procedure-related events (P = 0.006). There were no differences in age (P = 0.182), gender (P = 0.876), readmission rate (P = 0.317) and non-procedure-related post-operative complications (0.152).

CONCLUSION

This simple classification of perforated appendicitis appears to differentiate clinical outcomes well, particularly for iatrogenic morbidity, making it useful for operative preparation and outcomes research.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy is superior to open surgery for complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Over the last three decades, laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) has become the routine treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The role of laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis (gangrenous and/or perforated) remains controversial due to concerns of an increased incidence of post-operative intra-abdominal abscesses (IAA) in LA compared to open appendicectomy (OA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of LA versus OA for complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Database for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and case-control studies (CCS) that compared LA with OA for complicated appendicitis.

RESULTS

Data from three RCT and 30 CCS on 6428 patients (OA 3,254, LA 3,174) were analysed. There was no significant difference in the rate of IAA (LA = 6.1% vs. OA = 4.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.71-1.47, p = 0.91). LA for complicated appendicitis has decreased overall post-operative morbidity (LA = 15.5% vs. OA = 22.7%; OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.31-0.59, p < 0.0001), wound infection, (LA = 4.7% vs. OA = 12.8%; OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.19-0.36, p < 0.001), respiratory complications (LA = 1.8% vs. OA = 6.4%; OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.13-0.49, p < 0.001), post-operative ileus/small bowel obstruction (LA = 3.1% vs. OA = 3.6%; OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-1.0, p = 0.048) and mortality rate (LA = 0% vs. OA = 0.4%; OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04-0.61, p = 0.008). LA has a significantly shorter hospital stay (6.4 days vs. 8.9 days, p = 0.02) and earlier resumption of solid food (2.7 days vs. 3.7 days, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

These results clearly demonstrate that LA for complicated appendicitis has the same incidence of IAA but a significantly reduced morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay compared with OA. The finding of complicated appendicitis at laparoscopy is not an indication for conversion to open surgery. LA should be the preferred treatment for patients with complicated appendicitis.

Is single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy suitable for complicated appendicitis? A comparative analysis with standard multiport laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite emerging evidences on the feasibility and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) for managing simple appendicitis, advancing its use for treating complicated appendicitis remains unwarranted. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcome of SILA compared with that of standard multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (MPLA) in the management of complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

Between July 2013 and September 2017, 40 patients who underwent SILA and 150 patients who underwent MPLA for the treatment of complicated appendicitis, defined as AAST grades II-V, were recruited for this study. The demographic characteristics, intraoperative and recovery parameters were retrospectively recorded. No routine drainage was placed in the SILA group.

RESULTS

SILA was smoothly performed without requiring conversion to MPLA. No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in demography and preoperative severity. The operation duration was approximately 8 min shorter in the SILA group than in the MPLA group, without a statistical difference (60.03 ± 21.01 vs. 68.04 ± 32.03 min, p = 0.222). The recovery parameters, including soft diet intake and postoperative hospitalization, were more favorable in the SILA group (p < 0.001). Despite the absence of routine drainage in the SILA group, only 1 patient developed an intra-abdominal hematoma necessitating further computed tomography-guided drainage.

CONCLUSION

SILA is safe and feasible for the management of complicated appendicitis. SILA had non-inferior results to MPLA in terms of time to resume oral intake and postoperative hospital stay. Furthermore, this study posted a question on the concept of routine postoperative drainage in complicated appendicitis.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in adults: randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy did not meet the same acceptance in the setting of perforated appendicitis as in uncomplicated appendicitis in the general surgical community. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of laparoscopic and open appendectomy in perforating appendicitis.

METHODS

A randomized controlled study was conducted on 126 patients presenting with perforated appendicitis. Sixty patients were subjected to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and 66 patients underwent traditional open appendectomy (OA).

RESULTS

65 (51.6%) patients were female, and 61 (48.4%) patients were male in whom the mean age was 37.6 + 8.5 years. A significant difference was calculated in the domains of postoperative pain, less need for analgesics, hospital stay, and return to daily activities. The mean operative time was shorter in OA 94 ± 10.4 min than LA 120.6 ± 17.7 min. No statistically significant difference between both groups was detected as regard occurrence of intra-abdominal collection.

CONCLUSION

In view of its clinical outcomes, laparoscopy should be considered in the context of perforated appendicitis. The possibility of intra-abdominal collection should not be a barrier against the widespread practice of this surgical procedure amidst laparoscopic surgeons if adequate precautions are employed.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered.

Are Preoperative CT Findings Useful for Predicting Postoperative Intraabdominal Abscess in the Patients with Acute Appendicitis?

Background and objective: In patients with acute appendicitis (AA), preoperative computed tomography (CT) findings suggesting development of intraabdominal abscess (IAA) had not been widely used. The aim of this study was to investigate the preoperative clinical and radiological factors that predict the development of a postoperative IAA in patients with AA who were treated by laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). Methods: Two hundred and sixteen patients with pathologically proven AA underwent LA between January 2013 and March 2018 in our department. Medical records and preoperative CT images of these 216 patients were retrospectively reviewed and the predictive factors of postoperative IAA were investigated. In addition, patients were divided into complicated appendicitis (CA) and simple appendicitis (SA) and perioperative factors of two groups were compared. Results: One hundred and forty-seven patients were diagnosed with CA, while the other 69 patients were diagnosed with SA. Sixteen patients developed postoperative IAA in the CA group, while no patients in the SA group did. The univariate analysis revealed that time from onset to surgery more than 3 days (p = 0.011), the preoperative CT finding of periappendiceal fluid (p = 0.003), abscess (p < 0.001), and free air (p < 0.001), operation time more than 120 min (p = 0.023) and placement of a drainage tube (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the development of IAA. Multivariate analysis revealed that the preoperative CT finding of free air was independently associated with the development of IAA (p = 0.007, odds ratio = 5.427, 95% CI: 1.586⁻18.57). Conclusions: IAA developed predominantly in patients with CA. Preoperative CT findings of free air was found to be an independent predictor for the development of IAA. Surgeons should be meticulous in managing the postoperative course of patients with this finding.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of acute appendicitis using laparoscopy reduces the risk of wound infection, hospitalization time and return to normal activity. However, it increases the risk of intra-abdominal abscess, which is one the main complications of complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

We identified six systematic reviews including 55 studies overall, of which four were randomized trials. We concluded that the used of laparoscopy, compared to open appendectomy, probably reduces the time of hospital stay, and may reduce the risk of wound infection, but there's no clarity regarding the incidence of intra-abdominal abscess due to the very low certainty of the evidence available.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The removal of the acute appendix is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures. Open surgery associated with therapeutic efficacy has been the treatment of choice for acute appendicitis. However, in consequence of the evolution of endoscopic surgery, the operation can also be performed with minimally invasive surgery. Due to smaller incisions, the laparoscopic approach may be associated with reduced postoperative pain, reduced wound infection rate, and shorter time until return to normal activity.This is an update of the review published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) with regard to benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE and Embase (9 February 2018). We identified proposed and ongoing studies from World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials Register (9 February 2018). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and the congress proceedings of endoscopic surgical societies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LA versus OA in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes (or standardised mean differences (SMD) if researchers used different scales such as quality of life) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 85 studies involving 9765 participants. Seventy-five trials included 8520 adults and 10 trials included 1245 children. Most studies had risk of bias issues, with attrition bias being the largest source across studies due to incomplete outcome data.In adults, pain intensity on day one was reduced by 0.75 cm on a 10 cm VAS after LA (MD -0.75, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.45; 20 RCTs; 2421 participants; low-quality evidence). Wound infections were less likely after LA (Peto OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.51; 63 RCTs; 7612 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses was increased following LA (Peto OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.43; 53 RCTs; 6677 participants; moderate-quality evidence).The length of hospital stay was shortened by one day after LA (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.70; 46 RCTs; 5127 participant; low-quality evidence). The time until return to normal activity occurred five days earlier after LA than after OA (MD -4.97, 95% CI -6.77 to -3.16; 17 RCTs; 1653 participants; low-quality evidence). Two studies showed better quality of life scores following LA, but used different scales, and therefore no pooled estimates were presented. One used the SF-36 questionnaire two weeks after surgery and the other used the Gastro-intestinal Quality of Life Index six weeks and six months after surgery (both low-quality evidence).In children, we found no differences in pain intensity on day one (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.65 to 0.05; 1 RCT; 61 participants; low-quality evidence), intra-abdominal abscesses after LA (Peto OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.22; 9 RCTs; 1185 participants; low-quality evidence) or time until return to normal activity (MD -0.50, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.30; 1 RCT; 383 participants; moderate-quality evidence). However, wound infections were less likely after LA (Peto OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.42; 10 RCTs; 1245 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and the length of hospital stay was shortened by 0.8 days after LA (MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.62; 6 RCTs; 316 participants; low-quality evidence). Quality of life was not reported in any of the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Except for a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscesses after LA in adults, LA showed advantages over OA in pain intensity on day one, wound infections, length of hospital stay and time until return to normal activity in adults. In contrast, LA showed advantages over OA in wound infections and length of hospital stay in children. Two studies reported better quality of life scores in adults. No study reported this outcome in children. However, the quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate and some of the clinical effects of LA were small and of limited clinical relevance. Future studies with low risk of bias should investigate, in particular, the quality of life in children.

Efficacy of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy in treating complicated appendicitis for elderly patients

To assess the therapeutic effects of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in treating complicated appendicitis (CA) for elderly patients (defined as age 65 years and above). Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 115 elderly patients with CA who underwent surgical therapy in the Affiliated Huizhou Hospital of Sun Yat-Sun University, Huizhou, Guangdong Province, China between September 2014 and August 2016. Of these, 59 patients consented to open appendectomy (OA), and LA was performed in the other 56 patients. The perioperative and follow-up variables of the 2 groups were analyzed. Results: The operative time in the LA group was longer than the OA group (LA: 70.5±16.0 min versus [vs.] OA: 59.3±12.0 min, p greater than 0.001). The LA group had lower chances of incision infections (LA: 8.9% vs OA: 28.8 %, p=0.007) and shorter hospital stay (LA: 6.1± 2.5 days vs. OA: 9.6±3.5 days, p greater than 0.001). Return to soft diet (LA: 1.4 ± 0.8 days vs OA: 3.0 ± 1.6 days, p greater than 0.001) and time to out of bed (LA: 1.3±0.5 days vs OA: 2.5±0.9 days, p greater than 0.001) was faster in the LA group. The incidence of complications and 30-day readmission rate in the LA group was much lower than the OA group. Conclusion: Emergency LA in treating elderly patients with CA has the advantages of less trauma, definite curative effect, low complication rates, and fast recovery when compared with OA.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendicectomy in Adults with Complicated Appendicitis: an Update of the Literature

AIMS

To review and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LA) versus open appendicectomy (OA) in complicated appendicitis in adult patients, eight years after the last literature review.

METHODS

The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. Pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to search the PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases and extract relevant data. Methodological and quality assessment was undertaken with outcome meta-analysis and subgroup analyses of methodological quality, type of study and year of study. Assessment of clinical and statistical heterogeneity and publication bias was conducted.

RESULTS

Three randomised control trials (RCTs) (154LA vs 155OA) and 23 case-control trials were included (2034LA vs 2096OA). Methodological quality was low to average but with low statistical heterogeneity. Risk of publication bias was low, and meta-regression indicated shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) in more recent studies, Q = 7.1, P = 0.007. In the combined analysis LA had significantly less surgical site infections [OR = 0.30 (0.22,0.40); p < 0.00001] with reduced time to oral intake [WMD = -0.98 (-1.09,-0.86); P < 0.00001] and LOS [WMD = -3.49(-3.70,-3.29); p < 0.00001]. There was no significant difference in intra-abdominal abscess rates [OR = 1.11(0.85,1.45); p = 0.43]. Operative time was longer during LA [WMD = 10.51 (5.14,15.87); p = 0.0001] but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.13) in the RCT subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

LA appears to have significant benefits with improved morbidity compared to OA in complicated appendicitis (level of evidence II).

Laparoscopy in management of appendicitis in high-, middle-, and low-income countries: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency worldwide. Differences between high- and low-income settings in the availability of laparoscopic appendectomy, alternative management choices, and outcomes are poorly described. The aim was to identify variation in surgical management and outcomes of appendicitis within low-, middle-, and high-Human Development Index (HDI) countries worldwide.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, international prospective cohort study. Consecutive sampling of patients undergoing emergency appendectomy over 6 months was conducted. Follow-up lasted 30 days.

RESULTS

4546 patients from 52 countries underwent appendectomy (2499 high-, 1540 middle-, and 507 low-HDI groups). Surgical site infection (SSI) rates were higher in low-HDI (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.33-4.99, p = 0.005) but not middle-HDI countries (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.76-2.52, p = 0.291), compared with high-HDI countries after adjustment. A laparoscopic approach was common in high-HDI countries (1693/2499, 67.7%), but infrequent in low-HDI (41/507, 8.1%) and middle-HDI (132/1540, 8.6%) groups. After accounting for case-mix, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42-0.71, p < 0.001) and SSIs (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.14-0.33, p < 0.001). In propensity-score matched groups within low-/middle-HDI countries, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.23 95% CI 0.11-0.44) and SSI (OR 0.21 95% CI 0.09-0.45).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach is associated with better outcomes and availability appears to differ by country HDI. Despite the profound clinical, operational, and financial barriers to its widespread introduction, laparoscopy could significantly improve outcomes for patients in low-resource environments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02179112.

Bad bacteria in acute appendicitis: rare but relevant

PURPOSE

Bacterial infections are a factor for morbidity in patients with acute appendicitis (AA). The spreading of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria is a significant problem in surgery, and the most relevant MDR pathogens are summarized as Enterobacteriaceae, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococci (ESKAPE) bacteria. Data regarding the species and distribution of bacteria in AA are available, but information about the resistances and their relevance is deficient.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed microbiological swabs of patients with AA. The outcome parameters of patients after laparoscopic appendectomy were analyzed against microbiological results, including antibiotic resistance testing. Positive swabs were compared with bacteria cultivated after alternative abdominal emergency surgery (AES).

RESULTS

In total, 584 patients with AA were included and had a mean age of 35.5 years. In 216 patients (36.9%), a swab was taken, and in 128 (59.3%) swabs, bacteria could be cultivated. The most frequent organisms were Escherichia coli, Bacteroides species, and Pseudomonas. In 9.4% of the positive AA swabs, MDR germs were cultivated, and all of them were ESKAPE pathogens. Patients with MDR bacteria in AA suffered more infectious complications (p = 0.006) and needed longer hospitalizations (p < 0.009). In AES, aside from appendicitis, a different spectrum containing more MDR bacteria was cultivated (5.9 vs. 20.9%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although they occur less frequently in appendectomy compared to emergency surgeries for other abdominal diseases, MDR bacteria are traceable in this common disease and contribute to additional morbidity.

Optimal stump management in laparoscopic appendectomy: A network meta-analysis by the Minimally Invasive Surgery Synthesis of Interventions and Outcomes Network

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is the predominant method of treatment of acute appendicitis. There is insufficient evidence on the most effective management of the appendix stump. The aim of this study was to investigate the relative effectiveness and provide a treatment ranking of different options for securing the appendix stump.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing ligation methods of the appendix. The primary outcomes were organ/space infection and superficial operative site infection. We performed a network meta-analysis and estimated the pairwise relative treatment effects of the competing interventions using the odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval. We obtained a hierarchy of the competing interventions using rankograms and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.

RESULTS

Forty-three randomized controlled trials were eligible and provided data for >5,000 patients. Suture ligation seemed to be the most effective treatment strategy, in terms of both organ/space infection and superficial operative site infection. Statistical significance was reached for the comparisons of clip versus endoloop (odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.96) for organ/space infection; and suture versus clip (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.55) and clip versus endoloop (odds ratio 2.22, 95% confidence interval 1.56-3.13) for superficial operative site infection. The network was informed primarily by indirect treatment comparisons.

CONCLUSION

The use of suture ligation of the appendix in laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be superior to other methods for the composite parameters of organ/space and superficial operative site infection.

Retrospective review of laparoscopic versus open surgery in the treatment of appendiceal abscess in pediatric patients: Laparoscopic versus open surgery for appendiceal abscess

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has become well accepted, but the role of LA for appendicitis upon presentation with an abscess remains undefined. This study was to assess the postoperative recovery and complications following LA in pediatric patients with appendiceal abscess in comparison with open appendectomy (OA).We conducted a retrospective review of patients presented with appendiceal abscess between 2005 and 2016. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to adjust for any potential selection bias for the surgical approaches. In 108 matched patients, operative outcomes and surgical complications were evaluated based on LA or OA.The patients with LA experienced prompt postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery, like first bowel movement (risk ratio [RR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.69; P < .001), so spend the lower mean length of hospitalization (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.76; P < .001) in comparison with patients with OA. Furthermore, the immunologic and inflammatory variable white blood cell (WBC) (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.46-0.73; P < .001) and C-reactive protein (CRP) (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.86; P = .011) on postoperative days (POD) 5 was reduced in patients undergone LA compared with that of OA. A lower overall postoperative complication rate, including surgical wound infection (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81; P = .008) and incision dehiscence (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.45; P < .001) was noted in patients with LA compared with OA.LA was feasible and effective for appendicitis upon presentation with an abscess and associated with beneficial clinical effects, such as postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery and reduced postoperative complications. LA should be seriously considered as the first line procedure of choice.

Practice does not always make perfect: need for selection curricula in modern surgical training

BACKGROUND

It is hypothesized that not all surgical trainees are able to reach technical competence despite ongoing practice. The objectives of the study were to assess a trainees' ability to reach technical competence by assessing learning patterns of the acquisition of surgical skills. Furthermore, it aims to determine whether individuals' learning patterns were consistent across a range of open and laparoscopic tasks of variable difficulty.

METHODS

Sixty-five preclinical medical students participated in a training curriculum with standardized feedback over forty repetitions of the following laparoscopic and open technical tasks: peg transfer (PT), circle cutting (CC), intracorporeal knot tie (IKT), one-handed tie, and simulated laparotomy closure. Data mining techniques were used to analyze the prospectively collected data and stratify the students into four learning clusters. Performance was compared between groups, and learning curve characteristics unique to trainees who have difficulty reaching technical competence were quantified.

RESULTS

Top performers (22-35%) and high performers (32-42%) reached proficiency in all tasks. Moderate performers (25-37%) reached proficiency for all open tasks but not all laparoscopic tasks. Low performers (8-15%) failed to reach proficiency in four of five tasks including all laparoscopic tasks (PT 7.8%; CC 9.4%; IKT 15.6%). Participants in lower performance clusters demonstrated sustained performance disadvantage across tasks, with widely variable learning curves and no evidence of progression towards a plateau phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Most students reached proficiency across a range of surgical tasks, but low-performing trainees failed to reach competence in laparoscopic tasks. With increasing use of laparoscopy in surgical practice, screening potential candidates to identify the lowest performers may be beneficial.

The evolving management of the appendix mass in the era of laparoscopy and interventional radiology

AIM

An appendix mass is the result of a walled-off perforation of the appendix which localises, resulting in a mass and it is encountered in up to 7% of patients presenting with acute appendicitis. However, its management is controversial due to the lack of high level evidence. This review article sets out a rationale diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for the appendix mass based upon up-to-date available evidence.

METHODS

A literature review of the investigation and management of appendix mass/complicated appendicitis was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

No prospective studies were identified. The great majority of recent evidence supports a conservative management approach avoiding urgent appendicectomy because of the high risk of major complications and bowel resection. Appendix abscesses over 5 cm in diameter and persistent abscesses should be drained percutaneously along with antibiotics. Appendix phlegmon should be treated with antibiotics alone. Surgery is reserved for patients who fail conservative treatment. Routine interval appendicectomy is not recommended, but should be considered in the context of persistent faecolith, ongoing right iliac fossa pain, recurrent appendicitis and appendix mass persistent beyond 2 weeks. Clinicians should be particularly wary of patients with appendix mass aged over 40 and those with features suggesting malignancy.

Is laparoscopic appendectomy feasible for complicated appendicitis ?A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

laparoscopic appendectomy(LA) has proved to be a safe alternative to open appendectomy(OA) in uncomplicated appendicitis; however, the feasibility of LA for complicated appendicitis(CA) has not been conclusively determined.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility and safety of LA for CA through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and web of Science was performed for eligible studies published from the inception of the databases to January 2016. All studies comparing LA and OA for CA were reviewed. After literature selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers independently, and meta-analysis was conducted using Revman software, vision 5.2.

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 retrospective cohort studies(RCSs) were finally identified. Our meta-analysis showed that LA for CA could reduce the rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) (OR = 0.28; 95% CI: 0.25 to0.31, P < 0.00001), but LA did not increase the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess(IAA) (OR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.34, P = 0.40). The results showed that the operating time in the LA groups was much longer than that in the OA groups (WMD = 13.78, 95% CI: 8.99 to 18.57, P < 0.00001). However, the length of hospital stays in the LA groups were significantly shorter than those in the OA groups (WMD = -2.47, 95%CI: -3.75 to -1.19, P < 0.0002), and the time until oral intake(TTOI) was much earlier in the LA groups than in the OA groups (WMD = -0.88, 95% CI: -1.20 to -0.55, P < 0.00001). No significant difference was observed in the times of postoperative analgesia between the two groups(P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

LA was feasible and safe for complicated appendicitis, and it not only could shorten the hospital stays and the time until oral intake, but it could also reduce the risk of surgical site infection.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults and children: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA) in adults and children.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LA and OA in adults and children between January 1992-March 2016 were included in this study. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative complications, reoperation rate, operation time, postoperative stay, and return to normal activity.

RESULT

Thirty-three studies including 3642 patients (1810 LA, 1832 OA) were included. Compared with OA, LA in adults was associated with lower incidence of wound infection, fewer postoperative complications, shorter postoperative stay, and earlier return to normal activity, but a longer operation time. There was no difference in levels of intra-abdominal abscess and reoperation between the groups. Subgroup analysis in children did not reveal significant differences between the two techniques in wound infection, postoperative complications, postoperative stay, and return to normal activity.

CONCLUSION

LA in adults is worth recommending as an effective and safe procedure for acute appendicitis, and further high-quality randomized trials comparing the two techniques in children are needed.

Two-port laparoscopic appendectomy with the help of a needle grasper: better cosmetic results and fewer trocars than conventional laparoscopic appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

The two-port laparoscopic appendectomy technique (TPLA) lays between the conventional three-port trocar procedure and single-port laparoscopic appendectomy surgery. During TPLA, the appendix is suspended with stitches, resulting in perforation risk and difficulty in exploration.

AIM

We used a needle grasper in TPLA to hang and manipulate the appendix.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-four patients (10 female, 24 male) who underwent TPLA between February 2015 and November 2015 were analyzed retrospectively for patient demographics, duration of operation, laparotomy or conventional laparoscopy necessity, drain use, complications, and hospital stay periods. The needle grasper was inserted at the right under the abdominal quadrant (McBurney point) without an incision to hang and manipulate the appendix.

RESULTS

The mean age was 25.19 ±8.464 years; the mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.50 ±3.246 kg/m(2). ASA scores were 1 and 2. The operations were completed without any additional trocar in 34 patients. The mean operation time was 57.03 ±3.814 min. There were no intraoperative complications in any patients. Three patients required a drain; all were discharged after drain removal. Thirty-one patients were discharged on the 1(st) postoperative day; three patients with drains were discharged on the 2(nd) day. The mean hospital stay period was 1.18 ±0.535 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the needle grasper, the appendix was held and suspended and the mesoappendix was cauterized and skeletonized successfully in TPLA. Inserting a needle grasper into the abdominal cavity at the McBurney point to manipulate the appendix helps and does not leave a visible scar.

Does Conversion Adversely Impact the Clinical Outcomes for Patients with Complicated Appendicitis?

BACKGROUND

Although the feasibility of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in complicated appendicitis (CA) has been demonstrated, LA is typically underused in CA due to its high conversion rate. However, little is known regarding the clinical course of conversion in CA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2005 and April 2012, 1699 patients older than 16 years underwent an appendectomy at our institution. Of these, 207 were confirmed to have CA, which was defined as operative findings of gangrenous or perforated appendix, with or without abscess formation. Patients were divided into the following three groups: open group (OG), laparoscopy group (LG), and converted group (CG). Perioperative outcomes were compared between the three groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients underwent open surgery. Among the 169 patients for whom laparoscopic surgery was originally attempted, 20 (11.8%) were converted. Operation time was significantly longer and estimated blood loss was higher in the CG than in the other groups. Fewer overall complications were observed and the length of hospital stay (LOH) was shorter in the LG than in the OG and CG. However, no significant differences were observed between the OG and CG regarding the overall complication rate or LOH. Operation method was the only factor associated with postoperative morbidity in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

While completion by laparoscopy was associated with better outcomes than the other two procedures at all levels, open conversion did not increase the overall morbidity or LOH compared with open appendectomy. Laparoscopic approach could be a viable option even in the management of CA.

Analysis of Recurrence Management in Patients Who Underwent Nonsurgical Treatment for Acute Appendicitis

The recurrence rate for acute appendicitis treated nonoperatively varies between studies. Few studies have adequately evaluated the management of these patients when appendicitis recurs. We aimed to explore the recurrence rate and management of patients with acute appendicitis that were first treated nonoperatively.We identified patients in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database who were hospitalized due to acute appendicitis for the first time between 2000 and 2010 and received nonsurgical treatment. The recurrence and its management were recorded. Data were analyzed to access the risk factors for recurrence and factors that influenced the management of recurrent appendicitis.Among the 239,821 patients hospitalized with acute appendicitis for the first time, 12,235 (5.1%) patients were managed nonoperatively. Of these, 864 (7.1%) had a recurrence during a median follow-up of 6.5 years. Appendectomy was performed by an open and laparoscopic approach in 483 (55.9%) and 258 (29.9%) patients, respectively. The remaining 123 (14.2%) patients were again treated nonsurgically. Recurrence was independently associated with young age, male sex, percutaneous abscess drainage, and medical center admission by multivariable analysis. In addition, age <18, a (CCI) <2, medical center admission, and a longer time to recurrence were correlated with using laparoscopy to treat recurrence. Neither type of appendicitis, percutaneous abscess drainage, nor length of first time hospital stay had an influence on the selection of surgical approach.In conclusion, a laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed in recurrent appendicitis cases, and its application may not be related to previous appendicitis severity.

Acute appendicitis: proposal of a new comprehensive grading system based on clinical, imaging and laparoscopic findings

Advances in the technology and improved access to imaging modalities such as Computed Tomography and laparoscopy have changed the contemporary diagnostic and management of acute appendicitis. Complicated appendicitis (phlegmon, abscess and/ or diffuse peritonitis), is now reliably distinguished from uncomplicated cases. Therefore, a new comprehensive grading system for acute appendicitis is necessary. The goal is review and update the laparoscopic grading system of acute appendicitis and to provide a new standardized classification system to allow more uniform patient stratification. During the last World Society of Emergency Surgery Congress in Israel (July, 2015), a panel involving Acute Appendicitis Experts and the author’s discussed many current aspects about the acute appendicitis between then, it will be submitted a new comprehensive disease grading system. It was idealized based on three aspect of the disease (clinical and imaging presentation and laparoscopic findings). The new grading system may provide a standardized system to allow more uniform patient stratification for appendicitis research. In addition, may aid in determining optimal management according to grade. Lastly, what we want is to draw a multicenter observational study within the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) based on this design.