Laparoscopic appendectomy is superior to open appendectomy in obese patients

Surgical Complications Following Appendectomy in Obese Patients: A Single Tertiary Care Center Study

Background The escalating global prevalence of obesity raises concerns about its implications for health outcomes. While obesity is acknowledged as a major risk factor for various diseases, its impact on appendicitis and appendectomy outcomes remains less explored. Methods Data on overweight and obese adults aged 18 to 65 treated for appendicitis in King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia were collected retrospectively. The sample included 1,471 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between January 2015 and January 2022. The sample did not include patients who were outside the age range, underwent conservative or elective treatment, or were pregnant. Data were collected via the National Guard Health Affairs (NGHA's) BESTCare 2.0 system. Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) software. Results The final cohort comprised 564 patients, predominantly male (63.65%) with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.41. Comorbidities exhibited varying prevalence among BMI groups, with significant differences observed for diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. Notably, 86.35% of the patients did not present with complicated appendicitis or encounter complications, irrespective of BMI. The study found comparable rates of diagnostic CT scan usage across BMI categories. Obese patients displayed a statistically significant trend of longer hospital stays, potentially linked to increased comorbidities and being diagnosed at a later age. Conclusion While obesity has been linked to adverse health outcomes, this study found that appendicitis and its surgical management were less influenced by obesity than previously thought. The findings advocate a nuanced approach, acknowledging the impact of obesity on hospitalization trends. This study challenges the assumption that the management of appendicitis in the obese population needs a more tailored intervention.

The Impact of Obesity on Perioperative Outcomes for Children Undergoing Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review

Today, the prevalence of obesity in the pediatric population has increased dramatically. Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common surgical condition among pediatric patients. We aimed to investigate the impact of obesity on postoperative outcomes in terms of operative time (OT), length of stay (LOS), surgical site infection (SSI), overall complications, adverse events, and mortality in children undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis. An extensive search of the literature in PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted to evaluate the outcomes of normal weight (NW), overweight (OW), and obese (OB) children who underwent appendectomy. Although no statistically significant differences were noted in perioperative outcomes and overall postoperative complications between OW/OB and NW children in the majority of the included studies, prolonged OT and LOS and SSI were found in some studies. Moreover, no differences in terms of readmissions and ED visits were recorded. We conclude that the impact of obesity on postoperative outcomes for children undergoing appendectomy for AA is unclear, and, therefore, no safe conclusions can be drawn with the currently available data. Due to the lack of high-quality studies, further research is required to optimize the surgical approach and prevent unwarranted complications.

Comparison between laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in morbid obese patients

Purpose

To evaluate the laparoscopic approach advantages for the management of acute appendicitis in morbidly obese patients.

Methods

A prospective study included all morbidly obese patients who had presented to the emergency department at Sohag University Hospitals and were diagnosed with acute appendicitis between the 1st of June 2022 and the 31st of January 2023. All those patients were invited to participate in the research by randomization. The authors informed patients and their first-degree relatives about both techniques, signed a consent form for participation in the study. The authors categorized them into two groups; laparoscopic approach (group I) and open approach (group II). Comparisons were based on operative time, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and time until return to normal daily activities.

Results

The study enrolled 64 patients: 33 had a laparoscopic appendectomy, and 31 had an open appendectomy. The groups were similar in terms of clinicopathologic characteristics. The operating time was significantly shorter for Group I patients than Group II (Group I, 49.09±16.21 min vs. Group II, 68.03±15.78 min; P value less than 0.05). Regarding the length of hospital stay, twenty-six patients (78.8%) were discharged within the 1st 24 h in the laparoscopic group versus 17 patients (54.8%) in the open group (P value 0.041). The time until return to the routine daily work was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (11.27±2.6 days) than in the open group (17.23±4.8 days) (P value less 0.05). Four postoperative complications were reported in the study population: wound complications (infection, seroma formation), residual abdominal abscess, paralytic ileus, and thromboembolic complications (Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism). Group II had a statistically significant higher complication rate (32.3%) than Group I (9.09%) (P value 0.007).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy had superior clinical outcomes than an open appendectomy in morbidly obese patients. In addition to minimal invasiveness and better cosmetic results, it has a great advantage as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in morbidly obese patients with suspected appendicitis. It is also a safe and feasible approach with a low rate of complications with a well-trained expert surgeon.

Outcome and quality of life in obese patients underwent laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy

Background

Although obesity is a popular reason for choosing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA), however, the question of whether there is a difference remains. Our goal is to investigate if there is a difference between OA and LA in obese patients.

Methods

Fifty-eight obese patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis according to ALVARDO score at department of surgery at Suez Canal university hospitals from March 2020 till August 2021 were included. The study participants were assigned in two groups LA and OA. This study aimed to comparing between LA and OA regarding intraoperative complications, length of hospital stays, post -operative pain, and rate of post-operative complications. Meanwhile, using SF-36 scoring questionnaire, the quality of life was compared between both groups.

Results

A total of 58 patients were included in the present study (LG = 29 patients and OG = 29 patients). The early post-operative complications (within 30 days after surgery) were significantly lower in the LA group (5 patients out of 29) than the OA (11 patients out of 29). Additionally, lower incidence of complications was noticed in the LA group (2 out of 29 patients) compared to OA (6 patients out of 29) beyond 30 days after operation. Patients with laparoscopic surgery had statistically significant higher overall quality of life scores (SF-36) (72 ± 32) compared to open surgery patients (66 ± 35) 2 weeks after operation.

Conclusion

The laparoscopic procedure was associated with lower incidence of post operative complications. However, open appendectomy was superior for a shorter operative time. Laparoscopic approach is not only used for therapeutic purposes, but also it has a diagnostic role.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection following Emergency Cesarean Section: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence, risk, and associated factors that contribute to an acquired surgical site infection (SSI) after emergency cesarean section (CS).

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study was conducted in an acute district general hospital in England with 206 patients (101 SSI patients and 105 non-SSI patients) who had an emergency CS in 2017. Grade of surgeon, smoking status, preoperative vaginal swab status (positive or negative), diabetes status, age, body mass index, membrane rupture to delivery interval, and length of surgery were recorded. Risk factors were identified using simple and multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Body mass index was significantly associated with SSI (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.11 to 1.24; P < .001). Further, substantive nonsignificant associations were recorded between SSI and patient age and vaginal swab status.

CONCLUSIONS

Body mass index was the only significant risk factor for the development of an SSI after emergency CS, possibly because of the impact of excessive adipose tissue on the immune system and reduced effectiveness of antibiotics. Diabetes status, patient age, and preoperative vaginal swab status were not significantly associated with SSI. Improved guidelines and strategies for managing at-risk patients would enable clinicians to reduce the risk of SSI development. The importance of wound management including frequent wound cleaning, appropriate dressings, dressing changes, and education is highlighted. Future research on larger samples should be conducted to validate these findings.

Irreducible inflamed inguinal hernia with infected gangrenous omentum after laparoscopic appendectomy: a case report

We reported a rare complication of laparoscopic appendectomy in a 19-year-old patient, who was admitted with acute appendicitis and had no history of inguinal hernia. He underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for suppurative appendicitis. Eight days later, he presented with irreducible incarcerated right inguinal hernia. A non-manifested congenital inguinal hernial sac has been symptomized after laparoscopic gas inflation inside the peritoneal cavity, which resulted in widening of the internal inguinal ring and protrusion of the omentum. Besides that, the omental content became inflamed and gangrenous as a consequence of the suppurative appendicitis and the presence of purulent fluid in the pelvis. Therefore, there were two complications that occurred simultaneously after laparoscopic appendectomy: a manifested right inguinal hernia and incarceration and gangrene of its contents. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of irreducible inflamed inguinal hernia manifested for the first time after laparoscopic appendectomy.

Appendectomy in Patients with Morbid Obesity: Laparoscopic versus Conventional Technique

BACKGROUND Our aim was to determine the optimum appendectomy technique in patients with morbid obesity by evaluating laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) operations performed in these patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS The records of 2179 patients who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between January 2010 and April 2019 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients were excluded for the following: age.

Obesity and appendicitis: Laparoscopy versus open technique

Objectives

The clinical results of obese patients who have undergone open or laparoscopic appendectomy, whether one technique is superior to the other is still not clearly known.In our study, we compared the clinical results of obese patients operated with laparoscopic or open technique for acute appendicitis.

Material and Methods

We performed retrospective analyses of patients operated for acute appendicitis between the dates of July 2016 and July 2019 at Istinye University Faculty of Medicine Bahcesehir Liv Training and Research Hospital and Liv Hospital Ankara. Of the 241 patients whose height and weight information was accessible, 57 had a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher. Eighteen of these patients underwent open surgery while the other 39 underwent laparoscopic surgery. The primary result criterion was complication ratio. Secondary criteria were operation time and length of hospital stay.

Results

Upon comparison of laparoscopic and open techniques in terms of intraoperative-postoperative complications (p= 0.01), operation time (p= 0.02) statistically significant differences were found between the groups. However the mean length of hospital stay (p= 0.181) was similar in both groups.

Conclusion

In obese appendicitis patients, the laparoscopic technique proved to be superior to the open technique in criteria such as perioperative-postoperative complications, operation time, and etc. Length of hospital stay was determined to be similar between the groups.

[Appendectomy: open versus laparoscopic versus single port : Evidence for choice of surgical procedure]

The treatment of choice in acute appendicitis is still the surgical removal of an inflamed vermiform appendix. There is still some disagreement regarding the optimal access route, i.e. conventional open or minimally invasive. The best available evidence is used to answer the question of the current optimal choice of procedure. For laparoscopic appendectomy there are evidence-based benefits in terms of access trauma, postoperative pain, wound infection rates and convalescence. For the alternative minimally invasive procedure single port appendectomy, mini-laparoscopic appendectomy or NOTES appendectomy, there is still a lack of scientific evidence to advocate the broad clinical use of these procedures. It is recommended that whenever the infrastructure permits, laparoscopic appendectomy should be the treatment of choice.

Bayesian network meta-analysis of the effects of single-incision laparoscopic surgery, conventional laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis

The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) and open appendectomy (OA) for the treatment of acute appendicitis. PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies comparing the effectiveness of different appendectomy methods for treating acute appendicitis published prior to April 2016. ADDIS 1.16.5 software was used for data analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistic. Odds ratios or standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and pooled accordingly. Consistency was assessed using node-splitting analysis and inconsistency standard deviation. Convergence was assessed with the Brooks-Gelman-Rubin method using Potential Scale Reduction Factor (PSRF). Surgical procedure duration, duration of hospital stay, wound infection and incidence of abscesses were compared. A total of 24 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. A consistency model was used to pool data regarding the four outcomes. The PSRFs in each item were all <1.03. Pooled results showed that, compared with OA, SILS and CLA were associated with significantly shorter durations of hospital stay (all P<0.01) and lower risk of wound infection (SILS vs. OA P=0.02 and CLA vs. OA P<0.01, respectively), but no significant differences were identified between SILS and CLA. However, compared with OA, SILS exhibited a significantly longer surgical procedure duration (P=0.01) and lower incidence of abscesses (P=0.04), while no significant difference was observed between OA and CLA. This comprehensive network meta-analysis indicated that laparoscopic appendectomy, including SILS and CLA, may have more advantages for acute appendicitis compared with OA. Furthermore, SILS procedures require improvement and simplification to reduce the surgical procedure duration.

The impact of obesity on laparoscopic appendectomy: Results from the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program pediatric database

BACKGROUND

Childhood obesity is a worsening epidemic. Little is known about the impact of elevated BMI on perioperative and postoperative complications in children who undergo laparoscopic surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of obesity on surgical outcomes in children using laparoscopic appendectomy as a model for the broader field of laparoscopic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the Pediatric National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data from 2012, patients aged 2-18years old with acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were identified. Children with a body mass index (BMI)≥95th percentile for their age and gender were considered obese. Primary outcomes, including overall morbidity and wound complications, were compared between nonobese and obese children. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify the impact of obesity on outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 2812 children with acute appendicitis who underwent appendectomy were included in the analysis; 22% were obese. Obese children had longer operative times but did not suffer increased postoperative complications when controlling for confounders (OR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.83-0.072 for overall complications, OR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.84-1.95 for wound complications).

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity is not an independent risk factor for postoperative complications following laparoscopic appendectomy. Although operative times are increased in obese children, obesity does not increase the likelihood of 30-day postoperative complications.

Emergency laparoscopy: Role and implementation

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

Laparoscopic appendicectomy in obese is associated with improvements in clinical outcome: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Obese patients with general surgical emergencies provide unique challenges to the emergency surgical teams. Acute appendicitis is the most common adult acute surgical emergency encountered in practice. This systematic review evaluates the role of laparoscopic appendicectomy in obese by comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomy in obese versus non-obese and the laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in obese patients.

METHODS

Relevant comparative studies were identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed (1990-2013). Primary outcomes evaluated were mortality, overall morbidity and duration of surgery. Secondary outcomes evaluated were superficial (superficial wound infection) and deep surgical site infection (intra-abdominal abscesses), conversion to open surgery, and cost of the procedure.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective cohort studies and one prospective randomized controlled trial met the inclusion criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary and secondary outcomes between the obese and non-obese patients undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy in obese patients is associated with reduced mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.19 (95% CI 0.12-0.30), reduced overall morbidity (RR: 0.49 (95% CI: 0.47-0.51)), reduced superficial wound infections (RR: 0.27 (95% CI 0.21-0.35)), shorter operating times and post-operative length of hospital stay, compared to open appendicectomy. Methodological quality of the included studies is low.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendicectomy appears to be a safer alternative approach to open surgery in obese adult patents. There is no significant difference in the outcomes between the obese and non-obese patients undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in obese and non-obese patients

OBJECTIVE

We assessed whether increased BMI has a negative impact in children undergoing robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Records of patients who underwent RALP were retrospectively reviewed and separated into healthy weight, overweight, and obese cohorts based on age-adjusted BMI percentile, and surgical and postsurgical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 103 patients, there were 79 healthy weight and 24 overweight, with 10 of the 24 considered obese (BMI<85th, ≥85th, and ≥95th percentile for age, respectively). Cohorts were similar in respect to age, sex, laterality and symptoms. Operative time (234 min, 241 min, p=0.642; 254 min, p=0.324), EBL (7.1 ml, 10.5 ml, p=0.293; 6.8 ml, p=0.906), length of stay (1.2d, 1.2d p=0.545; 1.1d p=0.550), and narcotic administration (0.25 mg/kg, 0.25 mg/kg, p=0.545; 0.13 mg/kg, p=0.430) were similar between healthy weight, overweight, and obese cohorts, respectively. Complication rates were similar in regard to minor and major complications. There was no difference in decreased hydronephrosis (92.2%, 89.6%, p=0.440; 88.9%, p=0.730). Four patients (3.4%) required a reoperative procedure (three healthy weight, one overweight; p=NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the potential difficulties with surgery in overweight patients, our data indicate that robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty can be performed as safely and effectively in overweight or obese children as in healthy weight children.

Laparoscopic treatment of perforated appendicitis

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

Single-incision lift laparoscopic appendicectomy: A less expensive technique easy to learn

Appendicectomy is the most common abdominal operation performed on an emergency basis in most parts of the world. The laparoscopic technique has many advantages over conventional open surgery especially in women and obese patients. A further improved version introduced recently is using a single-incision (SILS). Inducing a pneumoperitoneum, as a necessary precondition of laparoscopic procedures, represents a restriction of the surgeon’s freedom of movement and can lead to typical though rare complications. Gasless laparoscopic surgery has most of the advantages of laparoscopic surgery without many of the disadvantages. It is also less expensive, and can be combined with regional anaesthesia. Furthermore, fewer disposable materials are necessary. We describe a series of single umbilical incision gasless laparoscopic appendicectomies performed in rural areas of India.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in obese patients: A meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective studies

BACKGROUND:

A meta-analysis of different kinds of studies was performed to assess outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in obese patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Retrospective and prospective studies enrolling patients with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m² were included. Primary outcomes were days of hospital stay, surgical procedure duration, and overall post-operative complication rate. Secondary outcomes were wound infection and intra-abdominal abscesses formation rate, hospital charges.

RESULTS:

Laparoscopic appendectomy showed to be significantly associated with lower wound infection (P < 0.001) and post-operative complication rate (P < 0.001). Surgical time was considered as a hallmark of technical challenge and resulted diminished in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.018). Although not clinically relevant per se, the statistically significant shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001) was probably the reason of decreased hospital charges (P < 0.001). Intra-abdominal abscesses formation rate was higher in the open appendectomy group (P = 0.058), although slightly above the statistical significance threshold.

CONCLUSION:

Laparoscopic approach seemed to show relevant advantages compared to open appendectomy, but a large prospective trial is necessary to collect high quality data and investigate long-term outcomes.

Acute appendicitis: position paper, WSES, 2013

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

Single incision pediatric endosurgery (SIPES) appendectomy--is obesity a contraindication?

INTRODUCTION

Single-incision pediatric endosurgery (SIPES) is gaining popularity and has been reported to be safe in acute (non-perforated) and perforated appendicitis. The feasibility of SIPES appendectomy in obese children is uncertain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After IRB approval, data were collected from a prospectively maintained SIPES appendectomy database for cases performed between April 2009 and March 2012. Patients were divided into obese and non-obese groups based on Center for Disease Control criteria. The surgical techniques, operative times, complications, conversion rates, and outcomes were recorded. Chi-square test and t-test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

SIPES appendectomy was attempted in 500 children. There were 21% obese, and 37% were female with median age of 10.9 ± 3.8 years. Mean operative time, blood loss, requirement of additional trocars, and intraoperative complications in non-obese and obese children were not significantly different. Mean hospital stay (2.3 days in each group), post operative wound infections (3.3% vs. 4.8%, p=0.55, non-obese vs. obese), and intraabdominal abscesses (4.3% vs. 2.9%, p=0.77, non-obese vs. obese) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

SIPES appendectomy may be accomplished successfully and safely in obese children. Obesity did not appear to be associated with increased risk of complications and was not a contraindication for SIPES appendectomy.

Hematocele after laparoscopic appendectomy

Patients with a patent processus vaginalis may be at risk for hematocoele if meticulous hemostasis is not practiced during laparoscopic appendectomy.

Background:

Laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the most common laparoscopic surgeries performed. We report an unusual complication of hematocele after laparoscopic appendectomy.

Case Description:

A 48-y-old male presented with swelling and discomfort in his right scrotum 11 d after he underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Before the surgery, he had no scrotal swelling or inguinal hernia.

Meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional multiport laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus that single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILS-A) is on a par with conventional multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (CMLA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of SILS-A when compared with CMLA.

METHODS

A literature search for studies comparing SILS-A and CMLA was performed. Studies were reviewed for the outcome of interest: patient characteristics, operative outcome, postoperative recovery, postoperative morbidity, patient satisfaction, and cosmetic results.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies comparing SILS-A and CMLA were reviewed: two prospective randomized trials, four prospective studies, and seven retrospective studies. Overall, 893 patients were operated on: by SILS-A in 402 cases (45.0%) versus 491 cases (55.0%) by CMLA. Patients in the SILS-A group were significantly younger than those in the CMLA group (31.2 versus 33.5 y). No other differences were found. Patient satisfaction score was impossible to meta-analyze.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendectomy via SILS-A may be considered as an alternative to CMLA. However, these results must be approached with caution as they are based on data from nonrandomized observational studies. The feasibility and safety of SILS-A must be mainly assessed for difficult clinical situations such as severe obesity, localized abscess, or diffuse peritonitis from a ruptured appendix in the setting of new prospective randomized trials.

Laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery decreases surgical site infection in obese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgical site infections rate in obese patients after laparoscopic surgery with open general abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND

In mixed surgical populations, surgical site infections are fewer in laparoscopic surgery than in open surgery. It is not clear if this is also the case for obese patients, who have a higher risk of surgical site infections than nonobese patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane library (CENTRAL) were searched systematically for studies on laparoscopic surgery compared with open abdominal surgery. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting surgical site infection in groups of obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30) were included. Separate meta-analyses with a fixed effects model for RCTs and a random effects model for observational studies were performed. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane method and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs and 36 observational studies on bariatric and nonbariatric surgery were identified. Meta-analyses of RCTs and observational studies showed a significantly lower surgical site infection rate after laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.19; 95% CI [0.08-0.45]; P = 0.0002 and OR = 0.33; 95% CI [0.26-0.42]; P = 0.00001). Sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of selection and detection bias confirmed the significant estimates with acceptable heterogeneity. No publication bias was present for the observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery in obese patients reduces surgical site infection rate by 70%-80% compared with open surgery across general abdominal surgical procedures. Future efforts should be focused on further development of laparoscopic surgery for the growing obese population.

Impact of body habitus on single-site laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis: subset analysis from a prospective, randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

There have been several series documenting the utility of single-site laparoscopic appendectomy. However, there are no data to support patient selection based on their physical characteristics. We recently completed a large prospective, randomized trial comparing single-site laparoscopic appendectomy with standard three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis. This dataset was used to examine the relative impact of body habitus on operative approach.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We performed an analysis of the dataset collected in a prospective, randomized trial of 360 appendectomy patients who presented with nonperforated appendicitis. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated and plotted on a growth chart to obtain BMI percentile according to gender and age. Standard definitions for overweight (BMI 85-95%) and obesity (BMI >95%) were used.

RESULTS

In the single-site group there were 26 overweight and 19 obese patients. In the three-port group there were 25 overweight and 16 obese patients. There were no significant differences between overweight and normal with either approach. However, with the single-site approach there was longer mean operative time, more doses of postoperative narcotics given, longer length of stay, and greater hospital charges in obese patients. In the three-port group, there were no differences between normal and obese patients.

CONCLUSIONS

When using the single-site approach for appendectomy, obesity in children creates longer operative times, more doses of postoperative analgesics, longer length of stay, and greater charges. However, obesity has no impact on three-port appendectomy.

Evidence to support the use of laparoscopic over open appendicectomy for obese individuals: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) in the obese population has been controversial. A recent SAGES guideline and a Cochrane Review have suggested a benefit for LA over the open approach but did not provide supporting data. This study is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the LA with open surgery in the obese population to provide a quantitative estimate of the relative benefits.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the online databases identified seven retrospective and prospective randomized studies that contained sufficient data on obese patients. Analysis was based on intention-to-treat. We calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The LA group contained more females (43 vs. 32 %, p < 0.001), had fewer perforations (18 vs. 23 %; p < 0.001), and fewer overall complications (OR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.37-0.63), including fewer wound infections (OR: 0.34; 95 % CI: 0.18-0.66). There was no difference in the intra-abdominal abscess rate between the groups (OR: 0.99; 95 % CI: 0.29-3.37). The LA group had a shorter length of stay (2.46 vs. 3.63 days; p < 0.001) but a longer operation time (96 vs. 78 min, p < 0.001). There was no heterogeneity between the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of the current published data establishes the laparoscopic approach to appendicectomy as the preferred technique for the obese population, delivering a 50 % reduction in morbidity, with a 66 % reduction in wound infections and a significantly shorter inpatient hospital stay without increasing the intra-abdominal abscess rate.

The "BASE-FIRST" technique in laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND:

Appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdomen, and appendectomy is the most frequent surgical procedure performed in the world. In recent times, laparoscopic appendectomy has been gaining increasing consensus, although comparison with traditional open surgery is still debated. Recent reports seem to agree in recognizing laparoscopy as the favourable approach in cases of non-complicated appendicitis, in women and in obese patients. The use of a linear stapler to close the appendiceal stump also seems to guarantee a dramatic decrease of complications and this observation could be the rationale for considering the laparoscopic approach to also be safe in complicated appendicitis. In these cases, dissection of the mesoappendix and isolation of the viscum could be very difficult and could cause complications. By proposing this technique using a laparoscopic approach, we try to permit a simple and safe section of the appendix leaving the detachment from vessels and from the neighbourhood to a second moment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We report our initial experience including the first 50 cases and proposing our personal technique of laparoscopic appendectomy.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:

We recorded only one intraoperative haemorrhage, one bladder perforation due to trocar insertion and no conversion. Our goal is to standardize and simplify the laparoscopic approach in order to give any surgeon, even non-expert ones, a simple way to remove the viscum especially in complicated pictures.

Laparoscopic approach to acute abdomen from the Consensus Development Conference of the Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e nuove tecnologie (SICE), Associazione Chirurghi Ospedalieri Italiani (ACOI), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Chirurgia d'Urgenza e del Trauma (SICUT), Società Italiana di Chirurgia nell'Ospedalità Privata (SICOP), and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

In January 2010, the SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery), under the auspices of the EAES, decided to revisit the clinical recommendations for the role of laparoscopy in abdominal emergencies in adults, with the primary intent being to update the 2006 EAES indications and supplement the existing guidelines on specific diseases.

METHODS

Other Italian surgical societies were invited into the Consensus to form a panel of 12 expert surgeons. In order to get a multidisciplinary panel, other stakeholders involved in abdominal emergencies were invited along with a patient's association. In November 2010, the panel met in Rome to discuss each chapter according to the Delphi method, producing key statements with a grade of recommendations followed by commentary to explain the rationale and the level of evidence behind the statements. Thereafter, the statements were presented to the Annual Congress of the EAES in June 2011.

RESULTS

A thorough literature review was necessary to assess whether the recommendations issued in 2006 are still current. In many cases new studies allowed us to better clarify some issues (such as for diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, pancreatitis, hernias, trauma), to confirm the key role of laparoscopy (such as for cholecystitis, gynecological disorders, nonspecific abdominal pain, appendicitis), but occasionally previous strong recommendations have to be challenged after review of recent research (such as for perforated peptic ulcer).

CONCLUSIONS

Every surgeon has to develop his or her own approach, taking into account the clinical situation, her/his proficiency (and the experience of the team) with the various techniques, and the specific organizational setting in which she/he is working. This guideline has been developed bearing in mind that every surgeon could use the data reported to support her/his judgment.

Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in obese patients: outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

BACKGROUND

Although open and laparoscopic appendectomies are comparable operations in terms of outcomes, it is unknown whether this is true in the obese patient. Our objective was to compare short-term outcomes in obese patients after laparoscopic vs open appendectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2005-2009), 13,330 obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30) who underwent an appendectomy were identified (78% laparoscopic, 22% open). The association between surgical approach (laparoscopic vs open) and outcomes was first evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Next, to minimize the influence of treatment selection bias, we created a 1:1 matched cohort using all 41 of the preoperative covariates in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Reanalysis was then performed with the unmatched patients excluded. Main outcomes measures included patient morbidity and mortality, operating room return, operative times, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a 57% reduction in overall morbidity in all the obese patients after the multivariable risk-adjusted analysis (odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.36-0.52; p < 0.0001), and a 53% reduction in risk in the matched cohort analysis (odds ratio = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32-0.65; p < 0.0001). Mortality rates were the same. In the matched cohort, length of stay was 1.2 days shorter for obese patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy compared with open appendectomy (mean difference 1.2 days; 95% CI, 0.98-1.42).

CONCLUSIONS

In obese patients, laparoscopic appendectomy had superior clinical outcomes compared with open appendectomy after accounting for preoperative risk factors.

Single-port transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy: a preliminary multicentric comparative study in 87 patients with acute appendicitis

Introduction. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been performed in many approaches such as open, laparoscopic and recently Single Port Access (SPAA). In order to elucidate its potential advantages, we compared the two laparoscopic approaches. Methods. 87 patients were included in a multicentric study for suspected appendicitis in order to perform (SPAA) appendectomy or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). All outcomes, including blood loss, operative time, complications, and length of stay and pain were recorded prospectively. Results. There were 46 patients in the SPAA group and 41 in the LAG with a mean operative time of 40,4 minutes in the SPAA group and 35,0 minutes in the LA group. Only one patient was converted to an open approach. We described only 2 complications. Pain was graded 2,8 in the SPAA group and 2,9 in the LA group, according to the AVS after 24 hours. Patients in the SPAA Group were more satisfied (7,5 versus 6,9) (P < 0.05). Same results were found for the cosmetic result (8,6 versus 7,4) (P < 0.05). Conclusion. Using the single port approach feasible and safe. The true benefit of the technique should be assessed by new randomised controlled trials.

Outcomes of perforated appendicitis in obese and nonobese children

INTRODUCTION

Despite abundant data on the impact of obesity in adults, little data exist that examine the impact of obesity on surgical outcomes in children. Therefore, we analyzed the impact of obesity on children with perforated appendicitis.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 3 prospective trials on perforated appendicitis between 2005 and 2009. Perforation was defined as a hole in the appendix or fecalith in the abdomen. There was no difference in abscess rate in the 6 arms of these trials. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated, and BMI percentile was identified according to sex and age. The obese group was defined as BMI greater than 95th percentile. Data were compared between nonobese and obese patients.

RESULTS

There were 220 patients, of which 37 patients were obese. The obese group was older with no other differences in presentation. Mean length of stay was 7.9 days in the obese patients compared with 5.8 days for the nonobese (P < .001). Mean operative time was 55.2 minutes in obese patients compared with 43.6 for nonobese (P = .003). Abscess rate was 35% in obese patients compared with 15% for nonobese (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Obese children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis experience longer operative times and suffer worse outcomes.

Laparoscopic appendectomy: new concepts

Over the last three decades more surgeons have used laparoscopic appendectomy as their surgical approach of choice in the management of patients with appendicitis. This includes special groups of patients, namely, pediatric, pregnant, and obese patients. Laparoscopy has the benefit of lower morbidity, decreased rate of wound complications, faster recovery, shorter length of hospital stay, and faster return to work over open appendectomy.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis in the obese population

BACKGROUND

Use of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been increasing in obese patients. We evaluated the outcomes of LA compared with open appendectomy (OA) in obese patients.

METHODS

By using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, clinical data of obese patients who underwent LA and OA for suspected acute appendicitis (perforated or nonperforated) from 2006 to 2008 were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 42,426 obese patients underwent an appendectomy during this period. In acute nonperforated cases, LA had a lower overall complication rate (7.17% vs 11.72%; P < .01), mortality rate (.09% vs .23%; P < .01), mean hospital charges ($25,193 vs $26,380; P = .04), and shorter mean length of stay (2.0 vs 3.1 d; P < .01) compared with OA. Similarly, in perforated cases, LA was associated with a lower overall complication rate (22.34% vs 34.65%; P < .01), mortality rate (.0% vs .50%; P < .01), mean hospital charges ($36,843 vs $43,901; P < .01), and a shorter mean length of stay (4.4 vs 6.5 d; P < .01) compared with OA.

CONCLUSIONS

LA can be performed safely with superior outcomes compared with OA in obese patients and should be considered the procedure of choice for perforated and nonperforated appendicitis in these patients.

Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in obese patients

BACKGROUND

Although there appears to be no outright benefit of laparoscopic versus open surgery for acute appendicitis in the general population, it has been suggested that in obese patients a laparoscopic approach may offer more conclusive gains. The aim of this pooled analysis of comparative studies was to evaluate clinical outcome following laparoscopic and open appendicectomy in the obese population.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases was performed. Primary outcomes were length of operation (min) and length of hospital stay (days). Secondary outcomes were presence of post-operative complications, wound and intra-abdominal complications. Weighted mean differences were calculated to assess the size of the effect of laparoscopic appendicectomy on continuous variables and Pooled odds ratio were calculated for discrete variables.

RESULTS

2309 appendicectomies were included in this analysis, 1122 laparoscopic and 1187 open appendicectomies. Analysis of primary outcome measures revealed a shorter length of post-operative stay associated with laparoscopic appendicectomy (weighted mean difference = -1.26; 95% confidence interval = -2.36 to -0.16; p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the groups for length of operation, post-operative complications, intra-abdominal or wound complications.

CONCLUSION

The results of this pooled analysis indicate that laparoscopic appendicectomy may be beneficial in the obese population with a shorter length of hospital stay, and a similar incidence of post-operative complications.

Consensus conference on laparoscopic appendectomy: development of guidelines

AIM

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is not yet unanimously considered the gold standard treatment for appendicitis, despite the increasing use of advanced laparoscopic operations and the high incidence of the disease.

METHOD

Due to the results of an audit which classified LA as widespread in Italy, a Consensus Conference was organized, in order to give evidence-based answers to the most debated problems regarding the operation. After researching the literature, a panel of 20 experts were selected and interviewed on hot topics; a subsequent discussion using the Delphi methodology was utilized in the course of the consensus conference and submitted to the evaluation of an audience of surgeons.

RESULTS

Checkpoint statements were formulated whenever an agreement was reached. A level of evidence was then assigned to single statements and the process revised by two external reviewers.

CONCLUSION

Consensus development guidelines are herein reported and regard diagnostic pathway, diagnostic laparoscopy, indications, behaviour in case of innocent appendix, technical aspects, learning curve; however, some questions remain unsolved due to the lack of evidence.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with lower morbidity in extremely obese children

PURPOSE

In recent years there has been worldwide increase in childhood obesity. However, in the beginning laparoscopic appendectomy in obese children was contraindicated, now it is commonly used for the treatment of appendicitis. The purpose of this study was to compare open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in extremely obese children.

METHODS

The hospital records of 1,383 consecutive patients, who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between 2000 and 2009 were analyzed. 238 children (17.2%) were extremely obese. Extremely obese was defined, as greater than 2 standard deviations above the standardized mean weight for age. 61 of 238 (25.6%) patients had open appendectomy and 177 (74.3%) underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. The length of hospital stay, operation time, complication rate and frequency of taking postoperative pain relief were compared between open and laparoscopic appendectomy in extremely obese children.

RESULTS

The incidence of complicated and non-complicated appendicitis was similar both in open and laparoscopic appendectomy group. Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in extremely obese children is associated with significantly shorter operating time (46.8 vs. 59.87 min, P < 0.05), lower overall complication rate (5 vs. 8.2%, P < 0.05) and lesser postoperative analgesia requirement (6.97× vs. 4.73×, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy should be the procedure of choice for the treatment of acute appendicitis in extremely obese children.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the obese patient: a subset analysis from a prospective, randomized, double-blind study

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes for patients randomized to either open or laparoscopic appendectomy are comparable. However, it is not known whether this is true in the subset of the adult population with higher body mass indexes (BMIs). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in the obese population.

METHODS

A subgroup analysis of a randomized, prospective, double-blind study was conducted at a county academic medical center. Of the 217 randomized patients, 37 had a BMI of 30 kg/m(2) or higher. Open surgery was performed for 14 and laparoscopic surgery for 23 of these patients. The primary outcome measures were the postoperative complication rates. The secondary outcomes were operative time, length of hospital stay, time to resumption of diet, narcotic requirements, and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36) quality-of-life data.

RESULTS

No differences in complications between the open and laparoscopic groups were found. Also, no significant differences were seen in any of the secondary outcomes except for a longer operative time among the obese patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, laparoscopic appendectomy did not show a benefit over the open approach for obese patients with appendicitis.

Single-port appendectomy in obese children: an optimal alternative?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with single-port appendectomy (SPA) in obese children.

METHODS

From January 2003 to June 2009, 94 SPA (65 women and 29 men, mean age of 12.4 years) were performed in children with appendicitis. Sixty-five of these patients were found to have normal weight, whereas 29 were obese. Patients' records were evaluated regarding operative time, intra- and post-operative complications, initiation of oral intake and histopathological findings.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in operative time between obese and normal weight patients. In the obese group, one wound healing disturbance was documented. In the normal weight group, there were one post-operative bleeding and one wound infection. There was no difference with regards to the introduction of feeds following appendectomy between the groups. Histological examinations revealed 15 normal, 32 acute, 21 phlegmonous, 20 chronic and two perforated cases of appendicitis, three neurogenic appendicopathies and one case of enterobius vermicularis related appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the advantages of single-port appendectomy in the evaluation of the peritoneal cavity, the minimal rate of intra-operative incidents with this technique and superior cosmetics validate this alternative approach of minimal access appendectomy in obese children.

Laparoscopic appendectomies: experience of a surgical unit

Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdomen in adults and appendectomy is the most common emergency abdominal procedure. Laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity only in recent years and the optimal approach for the treatment of acute appendicitis is still under debate. This retrospective study aimed at examining the current indications for laparoscopic appendectomy. 1024 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between February 1992 and December 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. 39.9% of patients (n=408) underwent emergency surgery. In 616 cases (60.1%) conservative management was performed in vain and these patients underwent an elective operation. In the 36 patients with an intraoperative normal appendix, other pathological findings were laparoscopically detected and treated. Conversion to an open procedure was required for 13 (1.3%) cases. The mean operative time was 38 min and the average length of postoperative hospitalization was 2.5 days. The overall morbidity rate was 2.6%. Laparoscopic appendectomy should be considered a procedure of choice for the treatment of non-complicated appendicitis. We stress the possibility to laparoscopically treat even complicated appendicitis in the surgical setting with substantial experience in minimally invasive surgery.

Initial experience of the feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy in different clinical conditions

Introduction. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a new technique developed for performing operations without a visible scar. Preliminary studies have reported the use of the technique mainly in cholecystectomy and appendectomy. We evaluated the feasibility of the technique in various appendicitis conditions including children, fertile women and obese patients. Materials and Methods. SILS technique was used in a random sample of patients hospitalised for suspected appendicitis. The ordinary diagnostic laparoscopy was performed and the appendix was removed if needed. The ligation of appendix was performed by thread loop, absorbable clip or endoscopic stapler. The details regarding the recovery of patients were collected prospectively. Results. Ten SILS procedures were performed without conversions or complications. The patient series included uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis patients. The mean age of the patients was 37 years (range 13-63), mean BMI was 26 (range 18-31), mean operative time was 40 minutes (range 18-31), and mean postoperative stay was 2 days (range 1-5). Conclusions. SILS technique is feasible for obese patients, uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis as well as for exploratory laparoscopy. Most common methods to ligate appendix are feasible with SILS technique. The true benefit of the technique should be assessed by randomised controlled trials.

[Laparoscopic appendectomy. The new standard?]

Since the introduction of laparoscopic appendectomy by Semm in 1983, the role of this minimally invasive surgical technique has been the focus of controversial discussion. Meta-analyses have identified its advantages as having significantly lower wound infection rates, less postoperative pain and earlier resumption of normal everyday activities. The disadvantages are higher rates of intra-abdominal abscesses, longer operating times and higher inpatient treatment costs. However, some of the advantages identified by meta-analyses have been called into question by the results obtained from research into aspects of care. These discrepancies are attributable to the different surgeons involved in the various studies. The results are greatly influenced by the qualifications and experience of the surgeons. Therefore conventional appendectomy using a right lower lateral McBurney incision should continue to be the gold standard. Surgeons who have extensive experience in the field of laparoscopic surgery can achieve better results with minimally invasive appendectomy than with open surgery. This also holds true for specific situations such as complicated appendicitis and for morbidly obese patients. However, the operating costs incurred for laparoscopic appendectomy are higher because it has been shown that removal of the appendix with a linear stapler is the most reliable method.