A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy

Post-Operative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Acute Complicated Appendicitis: A Single Center Study

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is a surgical emergency because of inflammation in the appendix leading to swelling, whereas acute complicated appendicitis is characterized by a gangrenous or perforated appendix with or without periappendicular abscess, peritonitis, and an appendicular mass. The laparoscopic approach in complicated acute appendicitis is a viable alternative method but is not practiced in all cases because of technical difficulties and unpredictable complications. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the primary and secondary outcome predictors of laparoscopic appendectomy in complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

A single-center prospective observational study was carried out after the approval of the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC). A total of 87 complicated acute appendicitis patients were included in the study. Clinico-demographic features such as age, gender, duration of surgery, post-operative pain, and hospital stay were monitored in different age groups of <20, 20-39, and >40 years, and the primary and secondary outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in acute complicated appendicitis were measured.

RESULT

Acute complicated appendicitis cases were observed mostly in people older than 42 years in the total study population. Laparoscopic appendectomy was conducted in all 87 acute complicated appendicitis patients, and the major surgical outcome predictors were monitored, such as mean operating time (87.9 minutes), post-operative pain (3.9 scores), and post-operative stay (6.7 days). Post-operative complications such as drain site infection (1.14%), enterocutaneous fistula (2%), and intra-abdominal abscess (7%) were observed.

CONCLUSION

Based on our observations, a laparoscopic appendectomy can be considered a viable alternative with an acceptable complication rate. Operative time varies from 84 to 94 minutes in different age groups and with the extent of the disease.

Needlescopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in young patients

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have reported that needlescopic appendectomy (NA) is a safe and effective procedure for appendicitis because of reduced trocar wounds and tissue trauma. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of NA in young patients under 40 years of age whose cosmesis matters with appendicitis by comparing it to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our database looking for patients under 40 years of age diagnosed with appendicitis who underwent NA or CLA from January 2013 to April 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: the NA group, and the CLA group. Data collected from each group included age, gender, body mass index, preoperative C-reactive protein, emergency or non-emergency settings, operative time, postoperative length of stay, postoperative complications, and pathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients underwent NA and 53 patients underwent CLA. The groups were similar in terms of demographic features. Pathological diagnoses were divided into the following categories: catarrhalis (n = 35), phlegmonous (n = 37), and gangrenous (n = 35). No significant difference was noted regarding the distribution of the three groups (P = .4). NA resulted in significantly shorter operative times (P = .0005), and reduced lengths of hospital stay (P = .03) as compared to CLA. There was no significant difference in the number of complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

NA might be an effective surgical technique when performing a laparoscopic appendectomy in young patients with appendicitis.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy Translates into Less Analgesics and Faster Return to Work in Asia

Background:

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is claimed to require less analgesic and allow for a faster return to work. This study examines whether these benefits hold true in Asian patient populations.

Methods:

A retrospective audit of emergency appendectomies over one year was conducted to study outcomes of postoperative pain, length of stay (LOS), duration of analgesia, and hospitalization leave (HL). A telephone questionnaire evaluated post-discharge analgesic intake, residual symptoms at follow-up, adequacy of HL and opinion on teleconsult reviews.

Results:

Of the 201 patients, 187 (93%) underwent LA. Presurgery symptoms were significantly longer in the open appendectomy (OA) group (mean: OA 3.79, LA 1.81 days; p = 0.026) which also had a higher frequency of perforation (71.4%). LA patients reported less pain compared to OA (LA 3.60 vs. OA 4.14; p = 0.068) but were prescribed the same 2 weeks of analgesics as OA. LOS was significantly less for LA (mean LA 3.09, OA 6.93 days; p = 0.006). Mean HL for LA and OA were 17.9 and 21.8 days respectively (p = 0.05). Nearly 83% patients did not complete the prescribed course of analgesics and 47% patients felt that HL was more than adequate. Seventy-five percent of patients were asymptomatic at hospital follow-up and nearly 41% agreed to teleconsult reviews.

Conclusion:

Majority of LA patients do not need 2 weeks of analgesics and their HL can be shortened for faster return to work thereby realizing the true benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Selected cases can be offered postoperative teleconsultation.

Case report of open appendectomy in treating acute perforated appendicitis with necrotizing fasciitis of the abdominal wall: A rare complication of a common disease

Acute appendicitis can be associated with uncommon complications such as necrotizing fasciitis. We present a case of a 37-year-old woman referred to our hospital with a 1-week history of significant weakness, anorexia, and mild abdominal pain. According to laboratory and radiographic data, the patient was diagnosed with perforated appendicitis and gangrene.

Incidental finding of double appendix during laparotomy for intussusception: A case report

•

A double caecal appendix is an uncommon anatomical variation with significant surgical implications.

•

Patients with double appendix are usually asymptomatic.

•

When symptomatic, the problems that may arise from a missed diagnosis have serious health consequences.

•

The double appendix can be classified using the Cave-Wallbridge classification.

Introduction

A double caecal appendix is an uncommon anatomical variation with significant surgical implications. A few cases of the double caecal appendix have been reported worldwide, mostly in adults. The diagnosis is, usually incidental, typically made intraoperatively.

Case report

We present the case of a 6-month-old boy with an incidental diagnosis of the double appendix during laparotomy for intussusception.

Discussion

The double appendix can be classified using the Cave-Wallbridge classification, which identifies three types of the duplicated appendix: A, B, and C. The complication of appendiceal duplications includes acute appendicitis, colonic perforation, obstruction, bleeding, pain, failure to thrive, abdominal mass. In the case of abdominal pain with diagnostic uncertainty, with appropriate patient selection (without hemodynamic instability), diagnostic laparoscopy may be offered as an initial intraoperative evaluation, and if the procedure cannot be safely completed laparoscopically, it can be converted to a laparotomy.

Conclusion

Although uncommon, knowledge of appendiceal duplication is of great significance in the surgical patient, as a missed diagnosis or delay in diagnosis in symptomatic patients may result in increased morbidity and possibly mortality secondary to sepsis, with its medico-legal ramifications in today's practice of medicine.

Cardiac complications and failure to rescue after injury in a mature state trauma system: Towards identifying opportunities for improvement

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac complications (CC) after injury are rare but contribute disproportionately to mortality. Variability in rates of CC and failure to rescue (FTR) after CC (FTR-C) within trauma systems may suggest opportunities for improvement, but we have not yet demonstrated the ability to identify high and low performers. We examined center-level rates of CC and FTR-C in a mature trauma system with the hypothesis that high-performing centers for each of these outcomes could be identified.

METHODS

Using a statewide trauma registry from 2007-2015, we developed multivariable logistic regression models on CC and FTR-C including patient demographics, physiology, comorbidity, and injury data. Predicted probabilities of each outcome were summed to generate expected event rates, which were compared to observed event rates to generate centerlevel observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios. We measured internal consistency between CC and FTR-C for centers using Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

Cardiac complications occurred in 5,079/278,042 (1.8%; center-level range: 0.9-3.8%) of included patients (median age 55 (IQR 34-76), 84% Caucasian, 60% male, 92% blunt, median ISS 9 (IQR5-16)). Death after CC occurred in 982/5,097 patients for an FTR-C rate of 19.3% (center-level range: 7.8-30.4%). 10/27 centers were high-performers (95% confidence interval for O:E ratio <1) for CC and 2/27 centers were high-performers for FTR-C, but internal consistency between these metrics was poor (alpha = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

Rates of CC and FTR-C vary significantly between hospitals in mature trauma systems but high-performing centers can be identified. Inconsistent performance between metrics suggests unknown institutional factors underlie performance for CC and FTR.

Unmodifiable Clinicopathological Risk Factors of Shoulder Tip or Subcostal Pain after Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Purpose

Appendectomy, which comprises most benign intra-abdominal surgeries, is currently assisted by laparoscopy in most cases. However, many patients complain of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain after laparoscopic surgery. In some cases, the pain lasts even several weeks after surgery. This study aimed to analyze unmodifiable clinicopathological factors of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and to minimize preoperative and postoperative discomfort.

Methods

Patients admitted for laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grades I and II, and ages 12~70 years were enrolled in the study. Postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and analyzed with the clinicopathological factors of the patients, including age, sex, weight, height, body mass index (BMI), and abdominal circumference (AC) difference.

Results

Of the 124 patients, 40 complained of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain with a VAS score of ≥4. The risk of the postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain increased in women (p=0.001). From a univariate analysis, the risk of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain increased with lower height, weight and BMI (p=0.002, p=0.001, p=0.012) and with greater AC difference (p=0.012). However, a multivariate analysis showed that lower weight was the only risk factor of postoperative pain (p=0.005).

Conclusion

The risk of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain after laparoscopic appendectomy was significantly increased with lower weight.

Single-Port Needlescopic Appendectomy in Children Using a Mediflex Needle: A New Simplified Technique

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy is among the most common surgical procedures. Needlescopic appendectomy (NA) is an acceptable, safe technique in children, but with many drawbacks such as a high conversion rate and long operative time. We present a new technique for NA in children using only a single port, Mediflex^® facial closure needle, and vascular access cannula (VAC). Patients and Methods: Single-port NA was attempted in 117 patients (51 boys, 66 girls). Under general anesthesia, a 5-mm camera port was inserted through the umbilicus. Two Mediflex needles and a 14-gauge VAC were introduced. The appendix was grasped and dissected from the surrounding tissues using Mediflex needles. In case of a mobile cecum, the appendix was pulled through the umbilical port, then an extracorporeal appendectomy was performed. In cases with a fixed cecum or severely inflamed appendix, a complete intracorporeal appendectomy was done. The suture was knotted in a sliding reef knot using a single instrument. Results: NA was completed in 117 patients (51 boys, 66 girls) with an average age of 10 years. Thirty patients underwent extracorporeal appendectomy. Eighty seven patients were treated by intracorporeal appendectomy. The mean operative time was 15 ± 3 and 25 ± 4 minutes for extracorporeal and intracorporeal appendectomy respectively. The hospital stay was 1.2 days on average (ranging 8 hours to 2 days). There was no single case of conversion. Family satisfaction was achieved in 97% of cases. Conclusion: The presented unique method for single-port NA using Mediflex^® appears to be a safe, acceptable technique for appendectomy in children that allows for excellent cosmetic results.

Comparison of Open Appendectomy and Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Perforated Appendicitis

Introduction Laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis is associated with improved outcomes. This study compares laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy in cases of a perforated appendix by assessing surgical site infection, mean operating time, and length of hospital stay. Materials and methods This study was a prospective randomized study conducted at the Department of Surgery, Holy Family Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, from January 2016 to January 2017, by randomly allotting the laparoscopic or the open appendectomy technique to 130 patients by the lottery method. Patients having a perforated appendix were included after they provided informed consent. Data were entered and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US). Results The frequency of wound site infection was significantly higher in open appendectomy (27.69%) than in the laparoscopic approach (10.77%; p=0.01). Mean hospital stay was slightly longer in the laparoscopic approach (4.38 ± 1.09 days) than in open appendectomy (4.18 ± 0.77 days; p=0.23). Mean operating time for laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy was 46.98 ± 2.99 minutes and 53.02 ± 2.88 minutes, respectively (p<0.000). Conclusion Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with fewer surgical site infections and shorter mean operating time than an open appendectomy.

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.

Evolving Management Strategies in Patients with Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: a Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction (aSBO), the decision to operate as well as the timing and technique of surgery have significant impacts on clinical outcomes. Trends in the management of aSBO have not been described at the population level and guideline adherence is unknown. We sought to evaluate the secular trends in the management of aSBO in a large North American population.

METHODS

We used administrative data to identify patients admitted to hospital for their first episode of aSBO over 2005-2014. We evaluated temporal trends in admission for aSBO and in management practices using Cochran-Armitage tests. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess trends when controlling for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Patients (40,800) were admitted with their first episode of aSBO. The mean age was 68.5 years and 55% of patients were female. The population-based rate of admission for aSBO decreased over the study period, from 39.1 to 38.1 per 100,000 persons per year. There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients who underwent surgery for aSBO (19 to 23%, p < 0.0001). Among those who underwent surgery, there were significant increases in the proportions of patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures (4 to 14%, p < 0.0001) and who underwent surgery within 1 day of admission (51 to 60%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Between 2005 and 2014, there was a decrease in the population-based rate of aSBO, which may reflect increased utilization of minimally invasive techniques. There were significant trends towards increased operative intervention, with surgery occurring earlier and increasingly using laparoscopic approach.

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.

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

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

Laparoscopic Procedure is Not Independently Associated With the Development of Intra-Abdominal Abscess After Appendectomy: A Multicenter Cohort Study With Propensity Score Matching Analysis

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify independent risk factors for postoperative intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) after appendectomy for patients with acute appendicitis.

BACKGRAOUND

Although laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been performed universally, whether LA is associated with an increased incidence of postoperative IAA compared with open appendectomy (OA) remains controversial, which causes some surgeons' increasing concerns.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 6805 consecutive adult patients with acute appendicitis who underwent LA or OA at 7 general hospitals in China. Patient characteristics, operative variables, and surgical outcomes were collected and compared between patients who underwent LA and OA. Propensity score matching analysis was used to minimize the bias in patient selection differing from various procedure of appendectomy. Independent risk factors associated with the development of postoperative IAA after appendectomy were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis in the propensity matched cohort.

RESULTS

Over a 3-year period, 2710 (39.8%) and 4095 (60.2%) patients underwent LA and OA respectively. Patients who underwent OA had more males, American Society of Anesthesiologists score 2-3, preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and perforated appendicitis than those who underwent LA (all P<0.01). Propensity score matched analysis created 2542 pairs of patients. Univariate analysis revealed that patients who underwent LA had a higher incidence of postoperative IAA than patients who underwent OA (6.7% vs. 5.3%; P=0.039). However, multivariate logistic regression analysis identified LA not to be an independent risk factor associated with the development of postoperative IAA (odds ratio, 1.053; 95% confidence interval, 0.922-1.657; P=0.216).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study identified that laparoscopic procedure was not an independent risk factor associated with the development of postoperative IAA after appendectomy of acute appendicitis. Therefore, concerns of increased incidence of IAA because of laparoscopic procedure are unwarranted.

Prospective, randomized comparison of the use of FloShield Air System® versus the reference technique (water + povidone-iodine solution) during gynecologic endoscopic surgery to evaluate the operative lens vision quality

BACKGROUND

The FloShield Air System^® is a new device for laparoscopic surgery that utilizes a continuous dry CO₂ gas flow over the scope to defog the lens and protect it from condensation, debris and smoke. We set out to compare the performance and efficiency of the device in terms of operative lens vision quality (OLVQ) with the reference technique (water + povidone-iodine (PVI) solution) during gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a single-center randomized prospective study between March and June 2016 (Trials Database Registration NCT02702531) including 53 patients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery with water + PVI solution and 51 patients who underwent surgical procedures with the FloShield Air System. The primary outcome measure was the number of laparoscope removals during surgery. Secondary outcome measures were the time to clean, assessment of the quality of vision, the correlation between the laparoscopic surgical complexity and outcomes, and cost effectiveness.

RESULTS

Overall, the mean patient age was 43.2 years (range 22-86) and body mass index 24.8 (range 16.8-42.7). The mean number of endoscope removals during surgery was 7.0 (range 0-37) in the water + PVI solution arm and 2.8 (range 0-12) in the FloShield Air System^® arm. The number of removals was significantly lower in the FloShield arm (p < 0.001). No difference in time to clean, quality of vision, level of laparoscopic procedure complexity, or cost was observed between the groups.

CONSLUSIONS

The FloShield Air System^® resulted in fewer laparoscopic lens removals than the water + PVI solution solution, but that there was no difference in quality of vision, cleaning time or cost, especially for the more complex surgery.

Hybrid transgastric appendectomy is feasible but does not offer advantages compared with laparoscopic appendectomy: Results from the transgastric appendectomy study

BACKGROUND

Very few transgastric procedures, the original objective of natural orifice translumenal surgery, have been reported in the international Natural Orifice Translumenal Surgery registers. In addition, most cases were controlled mainly by laparoscopy. To show the feasibility of hybrid transgastric appendectomy and to compare results with laparoscopic a prospective, nonrandomized study was conducted.

METHODS

From October 2010 to May 2013, patients with acute appendicitis were screened. If the patients met the inclusion criteria, transgastric appendectomy was offered. If the patient decided on laparoscopy, the consenting patients took part in the observational part of the study. The transgastric appendectomy procedure was controlled completely by the gastroscope, although a 3 mm grasper was used to tauten the appendix. Demographic and clinical parameters were collected. Quality of life and pain were measured with a Short Form-8 questionnaire and the Visual Analogue Scale.

RESULTS

Of the 273 patients who underwent an appendectomy, 65 agreed to take part in this study. Out of these, 30 (46.15%) underwent transgastric appendectomy and 35 (53.85%) underwent laparoscopy. No intraoperative complications were recorded. The operation duration rate was greater in the transgastric appendectomy group (94.5 minutes vs 69 minutes; P < .001). Conversions to open appendectomy and complications were the same. There were no differences in pain preoperatively or postoperatively. In both the transgastric appendectomy and laparoscopic groups, the quality of life of all the subscales increased markedly after successful resection of the pathology.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results demonstrate the feasibility of transgastric appendectomy. The postoperative course and quality of life are comparable with laparoscopic appendectomy, but no improvement due to transgastric appendectomy could be demonstrated.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed in emergency surgery. Because of lack of consensus about the most appropriate technique, appendectomy is still being performed by both open (OA) and laparoscopic (LA) methods. In this retrospective analysis, we aimed to compare the laparoscopic approach and the conventional technique in the treatment of acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Retrospectively collected data from 593 consecutive patients with acute appendicitis were studied. These comprised 310 patients who underwent conventional appendectomy and 283 patients treated laparoscopically. The two groups were compared for operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rate, return to normal activity and cost.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter hospital stay (2.7 ± 2.5 days in LA and 1.4 ± 0.6 days in OA), with a less need for analgesia and with a faster return to daily activities (11.5 ± 3.1 days in LA and 16.1 ± 3.3 in OA). Operative time was significantly shorter in the open group (31.36 ± 11.13 min in OA and 54.9 ± 14.2 in LA). Total number of complications was less in the LA group with a significantly lower incidence of wound infection (1.4 % vs 10.6 %, P <0.001). The total cost of treatment was higher by 150 € in the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach is a safe and efficient operative procedure in appendectomy and it provides clinically beneficial advantages over open method (including shorter hospital stay, decreased need for postoperative analgesia, early food tolerance, earlier return to work, lower rate of wound infection) against only marginally higher hospital costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02867072 Registered 10 August 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Systematic review of clinical outcomes after prophylactic surgery

Introduction Prophylactic appendicectomy is performed prior to military, polar and space expeditions to prevent acute appendicitis in the field. However, the risk-benefit ratio of prophylactic surgery is controversial. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence for prophylactic appendicectomy. It is supplemented by a clinical example of prophylactic surgery resulting in life-threatening complications. Methods A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE(®) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Keyword variants of 'prophylaxis' and 'appendicectomy' were combined to identify potential papers for inclusion. Papers related to prophylactic appendicectomy risks and benefits were reviewed. Results Overall, 511 papers were identified, with 37 papers satisfying the inclusion criteria. Nine reported outcomes after incidental appendicectomy during concurrent surgical procedures. No papers focused explicitly on prophylactic appendicectomy in asymptomatic patients. The clinical example outlined acute obstruction secondary to adhesions from a prophylactic appendicectomy. Complications after elective appendicectomy versus the natural history of acute appendicitis in scenarios such as polar expeditions or covert operations suggest prophylactic appendicectomy may be appropriate prior to extreme situations. Nevertheless, the long-term risk of adhesion related complications render prophylactic appendicectomy feasible only when the short-term risk of acute appendicitis outweighs the long-term risks of surgery. Conclusions Prophylactic appendicectomy is rarely performed and not without risk. This is the first documented evidence of long-term complications following prophylactic appendicectomy. Surgery should be considered on an individual basis by balancing the risks of acute appendicitis in the field with the potential consequences of an otherwise unnecessary surgical procedure in a healthy patient.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safer than open appendectomy in an elderly population

Background and Objectives:

This study describes perioperative patient safety outcomes comparing laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy in the elderly population (defined as age ≥65 years) during the diffusion of laparoscopic appendectomy into widespread clinical practice.

Methods:

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy in the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a 20% sample of inpatient discharges from 1056 hospitals, from 1998 to 2009, and used weighted sampling to estimate national trends. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to examine the association of laparoscopy with perioperative outcomes.

Results:

Patients who met the inclusion criteria totaled 257 484. Of these, 87 209 (34%) underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. These patients were younger (P < .001); had lower Charlson comorbidity scores (P < .001); were more likely to be white (P < .001), to be privately insured (P = .005), and to undergo surgery in urban hospitals (P < .001); and were less likely to have appendiceal rupture (P < .001). Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a decreased length of stay (4.44 days vs 7.86 days, P < .001), fewer total patient safety indicator events (1.8% vs 3.5%, P < .001), and a decreased mortality rate (0.9% vs 2.8%, P < .001). On multivariate analyses, we observed a 32% (odds ratio, 0.68) decreased probability of patient safety events occurring in laparoscopic appendectomy cases versus open appendectomy cases as measured by patient safety indicators.

Conclusion:

The data suggest that laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with improved clinical outcomes in the elderly and that diffusion of laparoscopic appendectomy is not associated with adverse patient safety events in this population.

A Novel and Scarless Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique: Two Ports in a Single Incision Plus One Puncture Without Trocar

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SILS-A) is now being performed in a great number of patients. However, SILS-A requires extended operation time and does not markedly decrease postoperative pain or improve cosmesis. To solve these problems, we developed a new technique for laparoscopic appendectomy that relies on 2 ports in a single incision plus 1 puncture (POP-SILS), and we can prove that this useful technique allows SILS-A to be easier and more cosmetic. The cases of 112 patients treated by laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) at our hospital between 2010 and 2013 were studied retrospectively. Forty-one were cases of locally complicated appendicitis, and 71 were cases of simple appendicitis. In laparoscopic appendectomy with POP-SILS, we maintain instrument triangulation using two 5-mm ports in the umbilicus and needle instruments that are introduced by puncture above the pubic bone. We studied the safety and usefulness of this method from the standpoint of operation time, postoperative stay, and complications. From 2010 to 2013, we performed 77 POP-SILS-LAs. Thirty-five patients required 1 or more additional ports or underwent conventional LA. The time required for POP-SILS-LA was 54 minutes (range, 23–209) in cases of simple appendicitis. Even in 17 cases of locally complicated appendicitis, POP-SILS-LA was successful. There was no statistical difference in surgical complications between POP-SILS-LA and multiport LA. Both the umbilical scar and the puncture scar eventually became invisible. The outcomes in our patient series showed POP-SILS-LA to be a safe and beneficial, minimally invasive approach to laparoscopic appendectomy.

Humidification during laparoscopic surgery: overview of the clinical benefits of using humidified gas during laparoscopic surgery

PURPOSE

The peritoneum is the serous membrane that covers the abdominal cavity and most of the intra-abdominal organs. It is a very delicate layer highly susceptible to damage and it is not designed to cope with variable conditions such as the dry and cold carbon dioxide (CO2) during laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects caused by insufflating dry and cold gas into the abdominal cavity after laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

A literature search using the Pubmed was carried out. Articles identified focused on the key issues of laparoscopy, peritoneum, morphology, pneumoperitoneum, humidity, body temperature, pain, recovery time, post-operative adhesions and lens fogging.

RESULTS

Insufflating dry and cold CO2 into the abdomen causes peritoneal damage, post-operative pain, hypothermia and post-operative adhesions. Using humidified and warm gas prevents pain after surgery. With regard to hypothermia due to desiccation, it can be fully prevented using humidified and warm gas. Results relating to the patient recovery are still controversial.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of humidified and warm insufflation gas offers a significant clinical benefit to the patient, creating a more physiologic peritoneal environment and reducing the post-operative pain and hypothermia. In animal models, although humidified and warm gas reduces post-operative adhesions, humidified gas at 32 °C reduced them even more. It is clear that humidified gas should be used during laparoscopic surgery; however, a question remains unanswered: to achieve even greater clinical benefit to the patient, at what temperature should the humidified gas be when insufflated into the abdomen? More clinical trials should be performed to resolve this query.

Appendectomy in women. Is the laparoscopic approach always better than the "open" approach in uncomplicated appendicitis?

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common emergency in abdominal surgery, but remains a continuing controversy regarding the most appropriate method of removing the inflamed appendix.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2012, 1037 women underwent appendectomy (average age: 25±15.7 y; range: 6 to 91 y). Of these, 519 underwent open appendectomy (OA) and 518 underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). For all the patients we determined the postoperative hospital stay, the eventual readmissions within 30 days after discharge, the length of surgical procedures (data were available only for the period from January 2008 to December 2012), the costs for the OA and LA, and the rate of negative appendicitis.

RESULTS

In our cohort of patients, 189 women (18.2%) had a negative appendectomy. Considering the postoperative hospital stay (average: 4.2±3.6 d; range: 1 to 32 d in OA group and average: 3.9±3.1 d; range: 1 to 21 d in LA group; P=0.15) there were no statistical differences between 2 groups. The average length of surgical procedures in LA group was 42.3±18.4 minutes (range: 8 to 135 min) and 43.2±19 minutes in the OA group (range: 10 to 135 min) (P=0.63). The average net cost of LA was 1203.61 euros, whereas for OA it was 95.18 euros. In this study, we considered only the surgical materials.

CONCLUSIONS

LAs are not associated with a lower complication rate than the OAs and, above all, LAs are more expensive than OAs. Also we believe that laparoscopic approach should be used only in case of unclear abdominal pain and not for the treatment of clear acute and uncomplicated appendicitis.

Minimally invasive is maximally effective: Diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy for penetrating abdominal injuries

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have evolved, allowing increased capabilities within most subspecialties of general surgery, but have failed to gain traction managing injured patients. We hypothesized that laparoscopy is effective in the diagnosis and treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing abdominal exploration following penetrating trauma at our Level 1 trauma center during a 6-year period from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2013. Demographic and resuscitation data were obtained from our trauma registry. Charts were reviewed for operative details, hospital course, and complications. Hospital length of stay (LOS) and complications were primary end points. Patients were classified as having nontherapeutic diagnostic laparoscopy (DL), nontherapeutic diagnostic celiotomy (DC), therapeutic laparoscopy (TL), or therapeutic celiotomy (TC). TL patients were case-matched 2:1 with TC patients having similar intra-abdominal injuries.

RESULTS

A total of 518 patients, including 281 patients (55%) with stab wounds and 237 patients (45%) with gunshot wounds, were identified. Celiotomy was performed in 380 patients (73%), laparoscopy in 138 (27%), with 44 (32%) converted to celiotomy. Nontherapeutic explorations were compared including 70 DLs and 46 DCs with similar injury severity. LOS was shorter in DLs compared with DCs (1 day vs. 4 days, p < 0.001). There were no missed injuries. Therapeutic explorations were compared by matching all TL patients 2:1 to TC patients with similar type and severity of injuries. Twenty-four patients underwent TL compared with 48 TC patients in the case matched group. LOS was shorter in the TL group than in the TC group (4 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). Wound infections were more common with open exploration (10.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.002), and more patients developed ileus or small bowel obstruction after open exploration (9.4% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is safe and accurate in penetrating abdominal injuries. The use of laparoscopy resulted in shorter hospitalization, fewer postoperative wound infection and ileus complications, as well as no missed injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV.

Surgical site infection after laparoscopic and open appendectomy: a multicenter large consecutive cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been rapidly applied worldwide recently. The issue of surgical site infection (SSI) after appendectomy needs to be re-investigated and analyzed along with this trend. This study aimed to identify risk factors of SSI after appendectomy in recent years.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted among patients with acute appendicitis who underwent either laparoscopic or open appendectomy (OA) at 7 general hospitals in China from 2010 to 2013. The incidence of SSI, classified as incisional SSI and organ/space SSI, was investigated. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess independent risk factors associated with overall, incisional, and organ/space SSI, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 16,263 consecutive patients, 3,422 (21.0 %) and 12,841 (79.0 %) patients underwent LA and OA, respectively. The incidences of overall, incisional, and organ/space SSI were 6.2, 3.7, and 3.0 %, respectively. The proportion of LAs among both procedures increased yearly from 5.3 to 46.5 %, while the incidences of overall and incisional SSI after appendectomy simultaneously decreased yearly from 9.6 to 4.5 % and from 6.7 to 2.2 %, respectively. In comparison with OA, LA was associated with lower incidences of overall and incisional SSI (4.5 vs 6.7 %, P < 0.001; and 1.9 vs 4.2 %, P < 0.001), but a similar incidence of organ/space SSI (3.0 vs 3.0 %, P = 0.995). After multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed, LA was found to be independently associated with a decrease in development of overall SSI [odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) OR (95 % CI), 1.24 (1.03-1.70); P = 0.04] or incisional SSI [OR (95 % CI), 1.32 (1.10-1.68); P = 0.01].

CONCLUSION

With the increasing application trends of laparoscopic procedure, the incidence of SSI after appendectomy declined accordingly. Compared with OA, LA was independently associated with a significantly lower incidence of incisional SSI, but a similar incidence of organ/space SSI.

Mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix with enterocutaneous fistula: a therapeutic dilemma

Mucinous cystadenoma of appendix is a rare clinical entity with very few reported cases in the literature. Consensus on optimal surgical management has not been reached. We report the case of a 65-year-old female patient who presented with fistula over the right iliac fossa. Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen suggested abscess of the parietal wall. Upon exploration, a mass was found to be arising from the tip of the retroperitoneal appendix and the retroperitoneum was studded with mucoid material. Appendectomy was carried out and final histopathology revealed mucinous cystadenoma with no evidence of malignancy. The patient was discharged uneventfully. The unusual presentation of this disease, as retroperitoneal psuedomyxoma without any intraperitoneal pathology, prompted us to report this case.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for complicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled trial to prove safety

BACKGROUND

To date, no randomized control trial has been performed comparing open appendectomy (OA) to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in complicated appendicitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis in 2010 concluded LA is advantageous to OA with less surgical site sepsis in complicated appendicitis; however, the level of evidence is weak (level 3a). The aim of the study was to determine whether LA is safe in the treatment of complicated appendicitis. Primary outcome included all-cause mortality and procedure-related mortality; secondary outcomes included intra-operative duration, rates of wound sepsis and re-intervention, length of hospital stay and re-admission rates.

METHODS

One hundred and fourteen patients were randomized prospectively to either OA or LA using a computer-generated blind method. Patients who were either less than 12 years of age, had previous abdominal surgery or were pregnant were excluded. A team of senior surgeons capable of doing both OA and LA performed all procedures.

RESULTS

The intra-operative duration, the rate of wound sepsis, the number of re-operations, the length of hospital stay and the rate of re-admissions between the OA and LA groups did not differ statistically.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe in complicated appendicitis. Current Control Trials (ISRCTN92257749).

Absence of intestinal inflammation and postoperative ileus in a mouse model of laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) is characterized by impaired gastrointestinal motility resulting from intestinal handling-associated inflammation. The introduction of laparoscopic surgery has dramatically reduced the duration of POI. However, it remains unclear to what extent this results in a reduction of intestinal inflammation. The aim of the present study is to compare the degree of intestinal inflammation and gastrointestinal transit following laparoscopic surgery and open abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Mice were subjected to laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy alone or, in combination with standardized intestinal manipulation of the small bowel (IM). Gastrointestinal transit and intestinal inflammation were assessed 24 h after surgery by the number of myeloperoxidase (MPO) positive cells and the level of cytokine expression. The recovery time and the degree of inflammation were also analyzed in patients subjected to colectomy under open conditions (laparotomy) or laparoscopic conditions.

KEY RESULTS

Mice undergoing IM by laparotomy (open IM), but not by laparoscopy (Lap IM) developed a significant delay in gastrointestinal transit compared to laparotomy or laparoscopy alone. In addition, there was significant intestinal inflammation only after open IM. Similarly, cytokine levels in peritoneal lavage fluid were lower while recovery time was faster in patients subjected to colectomy under laparoscopic conditions compared to open colectomy.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Our data confirms that intestinal inflammation is underlying the delayed gastrointestinal transit observed after open surgery. Most importantly, we demonstrate that intestinal inflammation under laparoscopic conditions is significantly lower compared to open surgery, most likely explaining the faster recovery following laparoscopic surgery.

Lessons learned with laparoscopic management of complicated grades of acute appendicitis

Background

Laparoscopy has not been consolidated as the approach of first choice in the management of complicated appendicitis. Methodological flaws and absence of disease stratification criteria have been implicated in that less evidence. The objective is to study the safe and effectiveness of laparoscopy in the management of complicated appendicitis according to laparoscopic grading system.

Method

From January 2008 to January 2011, 154 consecutive patients who underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis were evaluated in the prospective way. The patient’s age ranged from 12 to 75 years old (31.7 ± 13.3) and 58.3% were male. Complicated appendicitis refers to gangrenous and/or perforated appendix and were graded as 3A (segmental necrosis), 3B (base necrosis), 4A (abscess), 4B (regional peritonitis) and 5 (diffuse peritonitis). The outcomes including operative time, infection complication, operative complications and conversion rate were chosen to evaluate the procedure.

Results

The grade 3A was the most frequent with 50 (32.4%) patients. The mean operative time was 69.4 ± 26.3 minutes. The grade 4A showed the highest mean operative time (80.1 ± 26.7 minutes). The wound and intra-abdominal infection rates were 2.6 and 4.6%, respectively. The base necrosis was the most important factor associated with the conversion (5.2%). The grades 4A and 5 were associated with greater possibility of intra-abdominal collection. There were no operative complications.

Conclusion

The laparoscopic management of all complicated grades of acute appendicitis is safe and effective and should be the procedure of first choice. The laparoscopic grading system allows us to assess patients in the same disease stage.

Laparoscopic appendectomy in children: experience in a single centre in chittagong, bangladesh

Background. Since the latter half of 1980s laparoscopy has become a well accepted modality in children in many surgical procedures including appendectomy. We present here the experience of laparoscopic appendectomy in children in a tertiary care hospital in Bangladesh.  Subjects & Methods. From October 7, 2005 to July 31, 2012, 1809 laparoscopic appendectomies were performed. Laparoscopy was performed in all the cases using 3 ports. For difficult and adherent cases submucosal appendectomy was performed. Feeding was allowed 6 h after surgery and the majority was discharged on the first postoperative day. The age, sex, operative techniques, operative findings, operative time, hospital stay, outcome, and complications were evaluated in this retrospective study. Results. Mean age was 8.17 ± 3.28 years and 69% were males. Fifteen percent were complicated appendicitis, 8 cases needed conversion, and 27 cases were done by submucosal technique. Mean operating time was 39.8 ± 14.2 minutes and mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.91 days. About 5% cases had postoperative complications including 4 intra-abdominal abscesses. Conclusions. Laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe procedure in children even in complicated cases.

Risk factors of converting to laparotomy in laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis

Purpose

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for acute appendicitis has several advantages over open appendectomy (OA). In cases of complicated appendicitis, LA is converted to OA at a constant rate, though converting appendectomy (CA) has several disadvantages. We retrospectively determined preoperative risk factors for failure of LA and subsequent conversion to OA.

Methods

Consecutive cases of preoperative computed tomography (CT) and attempted LA were retrieved from our hospital database and grouped by procedure (LA versus CA). Patients with negative appendectomies (n = 28), opened appendectomy (n = 210), delayed interval appendectomy (n = 3), or who were <14 years of age were excluded.

Results

Average patient age, preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and diffuse peritonitis were significantly different between the groups. CT inflammation and occurrence of complicated appendicitis were significantly higher in CA than LA. Conversion to OA was mostly because of dense adhesions, diffuse peritonitis, and difficulties in excision of the appendix due to perforation or severe inflammation from surgical point of view. Postoperative complications were significantly lower in LA than CA, although the rate of intraoperative abscess was not different.

Conclusion

Most patients with acute appendicitis can be successfully treated with LA. We identified the following significant risk factors of CA: CT inflammation grade 4 or 5; complicated appendicitis; higher preoperative CRP level; and diffuse peritonitis.

Laparoscopic appendectomy in complicated appendicitis: Is it safe?

BACKGROUND

Because of lack of good evidence supporting laparoscopic approach for complicated appendicitis, we carried out this study to evaluate efficacy of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in management of patients with complicated appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was carried out in Surgical Department, Minia University, Egypt involving 214 patients underwent appendectomy for complicated appendicitis over three years. 132 patients underwent LA and remaining 82 patients underwent OA. Parameters studied included operating time, return to oral feeding, postoperative pain, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, duration of abdominal drainage and hospital stay.

RESULTS

There were four conversions, two due to extensive cecal adhesions and two due to friable appendix. LA took longer time to perform (p = 0.0002) but with less use of analgesics (p < 0.0001), shorter hospital stay (p < 0.0001), shorter duration of abdominal drainage (p < 0.0001) and lower incidence of wound infection (p = 0.0005). Nine patients in LA and seven patients in OA group developed intra-abdominal abscess treated successfully with sonographic guided percutaneous drainage. Postoperative ileus was recorded in two patients in LA group and three patients in OA group, chest infection in one patient in OA group, hernia in one patient in LA and fecal fistula was present in one patient in OA. Overall complications were significantly lower in laparoscopy group and managed conservatively with no mortality in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

LA in complicated appendicitis is feasible and safe with lower incidence of complications than OA and should be the initial choice for all patients with complicated appendicitis.

Laparoscopic approach in perforated appendicitis: increased incidence of surgical site infection?

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopy in the setting of perforated appendicitis remains controversial. A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the early postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) compared to open appendectomy (OA) in patients with perforated appendicitis.

METHODS

A total of 1,032 patients required an appendectomy between January 2005 and December 2009. Among these patients, 169 presented with perforated appendicitis. Operation times, length of hospital stay, overall complication rates within 30 days, and surgical site infection (SSI) rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of the 169 evaluated patients, 106 required LA and 63 OA. Although operation times were similar in both groups (92 ± 31 min for LA vs. 98 ± 45 for OA, p = 0.338), length of hospital stay was shorter in the LA group (6.9 ± 3.8 days vs. 11.5 ± 9.2, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were significantly lower in the LA group (32.1 vs. 52.4 %, p < 0.001), as were incisional SSI (1.9 vs. 22.2 %, p < 0.001). Organ/space SSI rates were similar in both groups (23.6 % after LA vs. 20.6 % after OA, p = 0.657).

CONCLUSIONS

For perforated appendicitis, LA results in a significantly shorter hospital stay, fewer overall postoperative complications, and fewer wound infections compared to OA. Organ/space SSI rates were similar for both procedures. LA provides a safe option for treating patients with perforated appendicitis.

Two cases of mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix successfully treated by laparoscopy

Two cases of mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix successfully treated by laparoscopy are reported. An 81-year-old woman with lower right back pain was diagnosed with mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix or appendiceal carcinoma and underwent elective laparoscopic surgery. The other case involved a 70-year-old man with hematochezia who was diagnosed with mucinous cystadenoma. He also underwent elective laparoscopic surgery. In these two cases, gauze was folded around the tumors rather than grasping them directly. The postoperative courses were uneventful, and these patients had no recurrent disease at 2-year follow-up. In such cases, surgical excision of the tumor without rupture is of paramount importance because rupture of the lesion can cause pseudomyxoma peritonei. Though appendiceal mucinous cystadenoma has been considered a contraindication of laparoscopic resection, it was possible to achieve this by using a laparoscopic procedure with a gauze technique.

Does laparoscopic appendectomy impart an advantage over open appendectomy in elderly patients?

BACKGROUND

The use of laparoscopy in the elderly has been increasing in recent years. The data comparing laparoscopic (LA) with open appendectomy (OA) in elderly patients are minimal. We evaluated outcomes of LA versus OA in perforated and nonperforated appendicitis in elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years).

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, clinical data of elderly patients who underwent LA and OA for suspected acute appendicitis were evaluated from 2006 to 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 65,464 elderly patients underwent urgent appendectomy during this period. The rate of perforated appendicitis was twice as high in elderly patients (50 vs. 25%, p < 0.01) and rate of LA in elderly patients was lower (52 vs. 63%, p < 0.01) compared with patients younger than aged 65 years. Utilization of LA increased 24% from 46.5% in 2006 to 57.8% in 2008 (p < 0.01). In elderly patients with acute nonperforated appendicitis, LA had lower overall complication rate (15.82 vs. 23.49%, p < 0.01), in-hospital mortality (0.39 vs. 1.31%, p < 0.01), hospital charges ($30,414 vs. $34,095, p < 0.01), and mean length of stay (3.0 vs. 4.8 days, p < 0.01) compared with OA. Additionally, in perforated appendicitis in elderly patients, LA was associated with lower overall complication rate (36.27 vs. 46.92%, p < 0.01), in-hospital mortality (1.4 vs. 2.63%, p < 0.01), mean hospital charges ($43,339 vs. $57,943, p < 0.01), and shorter mean LOS (5.8 vs. 8.7 days, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely with significant advantages compared with open appendectomy in the elderly and should be considered the procedure of choice for perforated and nonperforated appendicitis in these patients.

Transumbilical single port laparoscopic appendectomy using basic equipment: a comparison with the three ports method

PURPOSE

Single port laparoscopic surgery is a rapidly evolving laparoscopic surgical approach. We report a comparison of transumbilical single port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in a Korean military hospital.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study of 63 patients who received laparoscopic appendectomy was conducted between May 2011 and October 2011. Nineteen patients received TUSPLA and 44 patients received CLA. Clinical outcomes such as operation time, hospital stay, postoperative pain, diet, and postoperative complication were reviewed.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between TUSPLA and CLA patients, respectively, in operation time (58.9 minutes vs. 52.3 minutes, P = 0.262), duration of hospitalization (10.2 days vs. 10.6 days, P = 0.782), mean visual analogue scale score (2.6 vs. 2.5, P = 0.894), and return to diet (1.6 days vs. 1.7 days, P = 0.776). There were two cases (10.5%) of short-term complications in the TUSPLA group and four cases (9.1%) of short-term complications in the CLA group. All patients were fully recovered at discharge.

CONCLUSION

TUSPLA is a feasible alternative for CLA. When a glove port is used, no special instruments are needed. Thus, it can be performed in a hospital equipped with basic laparoscopic surgical instruments.

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 appendectomy for acute appendicitis versus chronic appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The advantage or disadvantage of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis remains unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were collected prospectively from 129 consecutive patients with appendicitis between June 2008 and December 2009. The clinical outcomes of acute appendicitis after laparoscopic and open operation were compared. Furthermore, the outcomes of laparoscopic procedure for acute and chronic appendicitis were compared.

RESULTS

The length of hospitalization and incidence of intra-abdominal abscess were significantly decreased in patients with laparoscopic group after operation as compared to open operation. The mean operation time, the time of first anal exsufflation, and oral intake after operation were longer for acute appendicitis patients than for chronic appendicitis in laparoscopic group. The incidence of postoperative intestinal obstruction in patients with acute appendicitis was higher after laparoscopic surgery than after open procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis is feasible and safe. However, laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis might cause more postoperative complications including intra-abdominal abscess and small intestinal obstruction compared to laparoscopic appendectomy for chronic appendicitis. These complications could potentially be avoided by improving techniques in operation.

Prophylactic surgery prior to extended-duration space flight: is the benefit worth the risk?

This article explores the potential benefits and defined risks associated with prophylactic surgical procedures for astronauts before extended-duration space flight. This includes, but is not limited to, appendectomy and cholecystesctomy. Furthermore, discussion of treatment during space flight, potential impact of an acute illness on a defined mission and the ethical issues surrounding this concept are debated in detail.