Impact of Resident-Performed Laparoscopic Appendectomy on Patient Outcomes and Safety

Practice patterns and factors influencing surgical trainees' involvement in laparoscopic appendectomy in Northern Italy's largest educational network

Introduction Laparoscopic Appendectomy (LA) allows residents to get early exposure to minimally invasive techniques. Despite its importance, involving residents as primary surgeons is a complex process, influenced by more than just clinical factors. Mentorship, environment, and perceptions play crucial roles. This study aimed to explore rates of residents' involvement in LA, the factors influencing the decision-making, and how surgeons and residents perceive the process. Methods We analyzed data from the REsiDENT-1 trial, covering 653 LA performed between 2019 and 2023 in 24 hospitals affiliated with the University of Milan. Adults with intraoperative acute appendicitis were included. Univariable analysis and multivariable logistic regression explored factors impacting residents' involvement and clinical outcomes. A survey captured the perspectives of surgeons and residents. Results Residents approached 35.9% of the procedures, with longer operative times 67.14 (± 28.1) vs 71.68 (± 24.44), p = 0.001. Trainees were more involved in academic hospitals and emergency surgery units and less complex cases with lower complication rates. Residents' involvement was hampered by patients' complexity in the multivariable analysis. Surgeons prioritized non-technical factors such as punctuality and reliability, whereas residents highlighted clinical complexity as a key consideration for the decision-making of the operator. Both groups agreed that structured feedback systems could improve the educational and training experiences. Conclusion LA remains a crucial procedure for surgical training, balancing hands-on learning with patient safety. Structured mentorship in academic and emergency settings could allow safe resident involvement. Future improvements should focus on clear feedback processes, better access to simulations, and standardized competency-based training to prepare residents for independent practice.

Teaching residents in emergency surgery for acute bowel obstruction-is supervised surgery safe and feasible? A retrospective single-center analysis from a MIS-specialized hospital

OBJECTIVE

Emergency surgery for acute bowel obstruction (ABO) is a common and occasionally technically demanding procedure, requiring both surgical skill and strategic planning. The risk entailed in teaching residents during ABO surgery has not been defined or investigated in detail to date. It is the aim of this study to reveal whether surgery for ABO, performed by resident surgeons under supervision, is safe and feasible.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis was conducted of all emergency surgeries for ABO performed between 2009 and 2023 at a community-based hospital. Patients' general characteristics, procedural data and outcome parameters were compared. Differences between teaching procedures and non-teaching procedures were analysed.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the Department of General and Visceral surgery at a community-based hospital (St. John of God Hospital Salzburg, Austria).

PARTICIPANTS

All emergency surgeries for ABO (n = 300 patients) that were performed during the study period were included.

RESULTS

Emergency surgery for ABO was performed in 300 patients during the study period, 15.3% of which operations were performed by residents under supervision and 84.7% by senior surgeons. No differences between these two groups were found in terms of patient characteristics, except for a past medical history of previous gynecologic or urologic surgery that was more frequent in the senior surgeon group (p = 0.02). Neither procedural data nor conversion rates from a minimally invasive (MIS) to an open (OS) approach, nor postoperative complication rates were found to be significantly different between these groups.

CONCLUSION

Emergency surgery for ABO, performed by residents under supervision, is safe and feasible, showing no significant differences in terms of complication rates, morbidity or mortality as compared to procedures performed by senior surgeons.

Can Ileostomy Reversal Be Safely Performed by Surgical Residents?

Background and Objectives: The growing number of colorectal cancer patients has highlighted the importance of surgical education in colorectal surgery. Despite the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical training, recent changes in the Polish surgical training program have increased the number of intestinal procedures required to be completed by residents. This study aims to assess the safety of ileostomy reversal procedures performed by surgical residents. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective cohort study, the LILEO study, was conducted from October 2022 until December 2023 across 20 Polish surgical departments. The study included 199 patients who underwent ileostomy reversal and were divided into two groups: 139 patients operated by specialist surgeons and 60 patients operated by surgical residents. The primary outcomes measured were postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 30-day reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes included the severity of perioperative complications assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification and a focused analysis of loop ileostomy reversal outcomes. Results: The median LOS was significantly shorter in the resident group (5.5 days vs. 6 days, p < 0.05). Although the overall complication rate was lower in the resident group (21.7% vs. 33.1% in the specialist surgeon group), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.105). The 30-day reoperation rate was 3.3% in the resident group and 8.6% in the specialist surgeon group (p = 0.179). In terms of severity, minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1 and 2) were more common in the specialist group (p < 0.05). The analysis of loop ileostomy reversals revealed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes between the two groups. Conclusions: Ileostomy reversal procedures performed by surgical residents under supervision are safe and feasible, with outcomes comparable to those performed only by specialist surgeons. These findings support ileostomy reversal as a valuable procedure for developing surgical residents' skills and do not negatively affect postoperative outcomes.

Trend of minimally invasive and open surgery experience of general surgery residents: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education general surgery case log in Thailand

Purpose

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) offers patients several benefits, such as smaller incisions, and fast recovery times. General surgery residents should be trained in both open and MIS. We aimed to examine the trends of minimally invasive and open procedures performed by general surgery residents in Thailand.

Methods

A retrospective review of the Royal College of Surgeons of Thailand and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education general surgery case logs from 2007 to 2018 was performed for common open and laparoscopic general surgery operations. The data were grouped by three time periods, which were 2007-2010, 2011-2014, and 2015-2018, and analyzed to explore changes in the operative trends.

Results

For Thai residents, the mean number of laparoscopic operations per person per year increased from 5.97 to 9.36 (56.78% increase) and open increased from 20.02 to 27.16 (35.67% increase). There was a significant increase in the average number of minimally invasive procedures performed among cholecystectomy (5.83, 6.57, 8.10; p < 0.001) and inguinal hernia repair (0.33, 0.35, 0.66; p < 0.001). Compared to general surgery residents in the United States, Thai residents had more experience with open appendectomy, but significantly less experience with all other operations/procedures.

Conclusion

The number of open and minimally invasive procedures performed or assisted by Thai general surgery residents has slowly increased, but generally lags behind residents in the United States. The Thai education program must be updated to improve residents' technical skills in open and laparoscopic surgery to remain competitive with their global partners.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing perioperative outcomes of emergency appendectomy performed by trainee vs trained surgeon

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is a benchmark operation for trainee progression, but this should be weighed against patient safety and perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of appendectomy performed by trainees versus trained surgeons.

RESULTS

Of 2086 articles screened, 29 studies reporting on 135,358 participants were analyzed. There was no difference in mortality (Odds ratio [OR] 1.08, P = 0.830), overall complications (OR 0.93, P = 0.51), or major complications (OR 0.56, P = 0.16). There was no difference in conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery (OR 0.81, P = 0.12) and in intraoperative blood loss (Mean Difference [MD] 5.58 mL, P = 0.25). Trainees had longer operating time (MD 7.61 min, P < 0.0001). Appendectomy by trainees resulted in shorter duration of hospital stay (MD 0.16 days, P = 0.005) and decreased reoperation rate (OR 0.78, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Appendectomy performed by trainees does not compromise patient safety. Due to statistical heterogeneity, further randomized controlled trials, with standardized reported outcomes, are required.

Comparison of surgical outcomes of emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis between attending surgeons and senior residents: A propensity-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is routinely performed for acute cholecystitis (AC) at our institution. This study was conducted to investigate the feasibility and safety of emergent LC for AC performed by senior residents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 362 patients with AC who underwent emergent LC between January 2012 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Of these patients, 328 were operated on by senior residents (SR), and 34 were operated on by the attending surgeon (AS). Clinical characteristics and surgical and postoperative outcomes were compared between the SR and AS groups. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias. When the operator was an SR, the LC was assisted by the AS.

RESULTS

Before matching, in the SR group, more patients had a history of abdominal surgery, and C-reactive protein and white blood cell counts were significantly higher. In the image findings, the minor axis of the gallbladder (GB) was longer, and the wall of the GB was thicker in the SR group. After propensity score matching, 28 pairs were identified. There were no significant differences in operative time (83 vs 88 minutes, P = .92), the amount of blood loss (25 vs 10 mL, P = .13), conversion to open surgery (3.6% vs 3.6%, P = 1), postoperative complications (7.2% vs 0%, P = .74), and postoperative hospital stay (4 vs 4 days, P = .87).

CONCLUSION

Emergent LC for AC performed by SR under supervision appears to be feasible and safe.

Academic Medical Centers Experienced Higher Rates of Post-Operative Health-Care-Associated Infections during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Post Hoc Analysis of an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Trial

Background: We sought to examine health-care-associated infections (HAIs) among patients undergoing an appendectomy at academic medical centers (AMCs) and non-AMCs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) peri-pandemic. We hypothesized that AMCs would have higher rates of post-operative HAIs during the first wave of the pandemic. Patients and Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective, observational, multi-center study of patients aged >18 years who underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis before (pre-CoV), during (CoV), and after pandemic restrictions were lifted (post-CoV). Patients were grouped according to hospital type (AMC vs. non-AMC). Our primary outcome was the incidence of post-operative HAIs. Results: There were 1,003 patients; 69.5% (n = 697) were treated at AMCs and 30.5% (n = 306) at non-AMCs. Patients at AMCs had greater rates of concomitant COVID-19 infections (5.5% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.0001) and worse operative appendicitis severity (p = 0.01). Greater rates of HAIs were seen at AMCs compared with non-AMCs (4.9% vs. 2%; p = 0.03). Surgical site infections were the most common HAI and occurred more often at AMCs (4.3% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.04). Only during CoV were there more HAIs at AMCs (5.1% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.02). Undergoing surgery at an AMC during CoV was a risk factor for HAIs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 8.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-71.03; p = 0.04). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, appendectomies performed at AMCs were an independent risk factor for post-operative HAIs. Our findings stress the importance of adherence to standard infection prevention efforts during future healthcare crises.

Clinical outcomes of locking polymeric clip for laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with appendicitis: a retrospective comparison with loop ligature

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) according to the method of appendiceal stump closure.

Methods

Patients who underwent LA for appendicitis between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into locking polymeric clip (LPC) and loop ligature (LL) groups. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups.

Results

LPC and LL were used in 188 (56.6%) and 144 patients (43.4%), respectively for appendiceal stump closure. No significant differences were observed in sex, age, comorbidities, and the severity of appendicitis between the groups. The median operative time was shorter in the LPC group than in the LL group (64.5 minutes vs. 71.5 minutes, P=0.027). The median hospital stay was longer in the LL group than in the LPC group (4 days vs. 3 days, P=0.020). Postoperative incidences of intraabdominal abscess and ileus were higher in the LL group than in the LPC group (4.2% vs. 1.1%, P=0.082 and 2.8% vs. 0%, P=0.035; respectively). The readmission rate was higher in the LL group than that in the LPC group (6.3% vs. 1.1%, P=0.012).

Conclusion

Using LPC for appendiceal stump closure during LA for appendicitis was associated with lower postoperative complication rate, shorter operative time, and shorter hospital stay compared to the use of LL. Operative time above 60 minutes and the use of LL were identified as independent risk factors for postoperative complications in LA. Therefore, LPC could be considered a more favorable closure method than LL during LA for appendicitis.

Surgical Trainee Supervision During Non-Trauma Emergency Laparotomy in Rwanda and South Africa

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to describe the level of surgical trainee autonomy during non-trauma emergency laparotomy (NTEL) operations in Rwanda and South Africa. The secondary objective was to identify potential associations between trainee autonomy, and patient mortality and reoperation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a prospective, observational study of NTEL operations at 3 teaching hospitals in South Africa and Rwanda over a 1-year period from September 1, 2017 to August 31, 2018. The study included 543 NTEL operations performed by the acute care and general surgery services on adults over the age of 18 years.

RESULTS

Surgical trainees led 3-quarters of NTEL operations and, of these, 72% were performed autonomously in Rwanda and South Africa. Notably, trainee autonomy was not significantly associated with reoperation or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Trainees were able to gain autonomous surgical experience without impacting mortality or reoperation outcomes, while still providing surgical support in a high-demand setting.

Structured Training for Lap Appendectomy for Residents (STAR Trial)-A Randomized Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common operation that is frequently performed by junior surgical residents. We investigated the effect of a structured training program on the proficiency of junior residents in acquiring skills necessary in this operation.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a randomized pilot trial. Between December 2014 and July 2018, twenty junior residents were recruited for this study. 11 were randomized to receive a structured training program of supervised, task-specific training. Each resident subsequently performed ten cases of laparoscopic appendectomy with their performance assessed for the last 5. The GOALS scale was used as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were perioperative outcomes. The effect of intervention on these outcomes were evaluated assuming a linear mixed effect multi-level model. The study was single-blinded as the assessors did not know which group each resident belonged to.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the total GOALS score or any of its individual domains. After adjusting for the number of operations done within the trial, the mean difference between the total GOALS score was 0.07 (95% CI -0.76 to 0.90, P=0.866). Blood loss, hospital stay and postoperative complication rates were similar. There was suggestion of a shorter operative time (effect estimate -9.03, 95% CI -19.56 to 1.50) in the intervention arm although statistical significance was not achieved. No avoidable adverse events due to this study were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Structured training program did not significantly improve surgical performance and outcomes in laparoscopic appendectomy in this pilot trial. Despite these findings, residents can still potentially mount their learning curves in laparoscopy earlier in a safe environment with such a program which is especially important in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

Appendectomy as Teaching Operation: No Compromise in Safety-An Audit of 17,106 Patients

OBJECTIVE

In a surgical career, teaching of surgical procedures plays a central role. In this study we want to evaluate the influence of teaching in appendectomies on the in-hospital outcome.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospectively, 26,436 cases from the national quality measurement database (AQC) between the years 2009 and 2017 were evaluated using the diagnosis and the procedure codes. Included were all cases with appendicitis (International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes K35-K37), surgical treatment (appendectomy), and a documented teaching status of the procedure. Variables were sought in bivariate and multivariate analyses. The occurrence of any complication was the primary outcome, whereas in-hospital mortality was the secondary outcome.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 17,106 patients with a mean age of 37 ± 19 years remained for final analysis. A total of 6267 operations (37%), were conducted as teaching-operations. Seventy-four percent of all teaching procedures were performed by residents.

RESULTS

We found no statistical association between teaching operations and complication rates or mortality. However, the teaching group showed longer duration of surgery (+ 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no influence of the training status of the appendectomy procedure on complication rates and in-hospital mortality. However, there was a prolonged duration of surgery. Despite these statistically significant differences, a comparable clinical outcome was observed in all patients, thus justifying the benefits of resident training.

Quantifying the effect of resident education on outcomes in pediatric appendicitis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Surgical residents are involved in the care of patients in a climate where quality of care is an important outcome measure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of resident involvement on appendectomy outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed appendectomies, ages 0-18, from January 2016 to December 2018. Operative time, operative charges, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated for cases with and without a resident. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Of 1842 appendectomies (1267 resident present and 575 no resident present), there was no difference in postoperative stay, abscess formation, readmission, or emergency room visits for simple or complex appendicitis. Operative time was significantly longer for cases of simple appendicitis by 10 min (p = <0.0001) and charges significantly higher by $600 (p = <0.0001) when a resident was involved in the case. These differences held true for complex appendicitis (time longer by 9 min, p = <0.0001 and charges higher by $500, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Resident involvement results in an increase in operative time and charges, with no difference in length of stay or complications. These results highlight the cost of resident involvement, without an increase in complications experienced by patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III evidence.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy Performed by Surgical Interns: Is it Too Early?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is a common procedure among surgical trainees. However, first-year residents' involvement in this procedure is scarcely studied. We aimed to determine the safety and outcomes of LA performed by surgical interns early in their first year of surgical training.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent LA for acute appendicitis from 2006 to 2019 was performed. All patients operated by surgical interns were included. The sample was divided into 2 groups: LA performed during the first (G1) and last 3 months (G2) of their first year of residency. Demographics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 2009 LA were performed during the study period; 1647 (82%) were done by surgical interns. A total of 934 LA were performed at both ends of the year; 505 belonged to G1 and 429 to G2. Each surgical intern performed a mean of 40 LA. Demographics, complicated appendicitis rates, and presence of peritonitis were comparable between groups. Operative time was longer in G1 (G1: 61 vs. G2: 52 min, P<0.0001). Major morbidity (G1: 2.1% vs. G2: 3.4%, P=0.2), postoperative intra-abdominal abscess rates (G1: 2.8% vs. G2: 2.8%, P=0.66), median length of hospital stay (G1: 1.9 vs. G2: 1.8 d, P=0.59), and readmission rates (G1: 1.6% vs. G2: 2%, P=0.73) were similar between groups. There was no mortality in the series.

CONCLUSIONS

LA can be safely performed by supervised surgical interns early in their training. Despite a longer operative time, postoperative outcomes were favorable and similar as those achieved at the end of surgical internship.

How Does a New General Surgery Residency Program's Junior Residents Impact Hospital Efficiency and Productivity?

OBJECTIVE

The general surgery workforce deficit is projected to grow to 15% to 21% by 2050. An estimated 6.6% increase to existing general surgery residency (GSR) programs is needed to meet this shortfall. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a new GSR program on efficiency and productivity at a regional healthcare center.

STUDY DESIGN

An institutional database was retrospectively queried for all GSR related procedures between July 2015 and June 2018. Procedures done prior to GSR initiation (pre-GSR) were compared to those done after (post-GSR). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We reviewed 10,617 procedures (6365 pre-GSR vs. 4252 post-GSR). Patients had lower preoperative Hierarchical Condition Category scores in the post-GSR group (0.71 vs. 0.58, p < 0.01). Operative times increased post-GSR (101.7 vs. 109.1 minutes, p < 0.01), but length of stay decreased (6.4 vs. 5.5 days, p = 0.01). Thirty-day readmissions (4.0% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.11) were comparable, but reoperations significantly decreased post-GSR (10.1% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.01). Average hospital costs remained unchanged ($10,765 vs. $10,140, p = 0.12). Multivariate analysis revealed no statistical difference in operative times, length of stay, 30-day readmissions and reoperations, and hospital costs between the 2 groups. Subset analysis based on surgical service also showed no statistical difference. Productivity increased on the general surgery service post-GSR (7.1 vs. 7.8 cases per day, p = 0.02). Patient satisfaction increased post-GSR (76% vs. 81%, p = 0.31), but without statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

The initiation of a new GSR program did not negatively impact operative times, length of stay, 30-day readmissions and reoperations, hospital costs, case volume, or patient satisfaction.

The Cost of the "July Effect" in Microsurgery

The existence of the "July effect," or the idea that the new academic year intrinsically has an increased complication rate is evaluated in microsurgical free tissue transfer procedures. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry was queried for all free flap procedures performed between 2005 and 2016 (n = 3405). Cases were grouped as having occurred in the first academic quarter (Q1: July 1-September 30) or fourth quarter (Q4: April 1-June 30). Demographical data and complications were compared using univariate χ analysis, multivariate logistic regression was used to control for confounding variables, and inpatient stay and operating cost estimates were created. Of a total of 1722 cases, 905 were performed in the first academic quarter and 817 were performed in the fourth academic quarter. There was no significant difference between Q1 and Q4 in readmission rate (P = 0.378) or reoperation rate (P = 0.730). Patients in Q1 had significantly longer operative times (P = 0.001) and length of stay (P = 0.002) compared with those in Q4. In addition, cost of inpatient stay and operating costs associated with each free flap were significantly increased in Q1 compared with Q4 (P = 0.029; P = 0.001). The total cost per quarter for free flaps was also significantly more expensive in Q1 vs Q4, with the highest average difference in cost of $350,010.64 (P = 0.001). Having surgery early in the academic year does not put patients at any increased risk for major complications but is associated with increased operating time, length of stay, and total cost.

Feasibility and Safety of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy by a Surgical Resident under Supervision of a Staff Surgeon

Purpose

This study was aimed at reporting our experience with single-incision laparoscopic appendectomies (SILA) performed by a surgical resident, and to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the procedure, together with a comparison of the outcomes of the same procedure performed by a staff surgeon.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective case series analysis of 60 consecutive patients who underwent SILA. Two surgeons, an attending staff surgeon and a second-year surgical resident, performed the SILA procedures. SILA procedures performed by the resident were intraoperatively guided and supervised by the staff surgeon.

Results

A total of 60 case-matched patients with acute appendicitis underwent a SILA performed by either the resident or attending staff. There was no difference in patient demographics between the two groups of patients. The mean operation time was longer in the resident group than in the staff group (43.2±6.0 minutes vs. 32.9±10.5 minutes, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the operative data between the two groups. No conversion to an open procedure occurred in either group. Postoperative pain, time to onset of oral intake, and number of days of postoperative hospital stay were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

SILA procedures performed by a resident are safe and feasible despite longer operation times. Perioperative supervision and guidance by an attending staff surgeon may facilitate surgical outcomes.

Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic Appendectomy Performed by Residents with No Experience in Open Appendectomy

Introduction:

Open appendectomy for acute appendicitis is a common procedure for surgical residents to perform at the beginning of their training. Recently, many programs have moved to laparoscopic appendectomy as the initial training procedure. However, the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis performed by surgical residents without any experience of open appendectomy remains controversial.

Methods:

The records of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis between August 2006 and March 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were assigned to two groups according to whether their procedure was performed by a surgical resident, with no experience of open appendectomy, or a surgical fellow, with adequate open appendectomy experience but no experience with laparoscopic appendectomy.

Results:

A total of 130 patients were included. Five residents performed 104 procedures, and three fellows performed 26 procedures. The baseline patient characteristics were comparable between groups. The median operative time was comparable (77.0 min vs. 65.5 min; p = 0.771). There were no significant differences in overall complications; with 14 patients (13%) in the resident group and five patients (19%) in the fellow group experienced complications (p = 0.535). No patient required reoperation, and there were no fatalities. The median length of stay was similar (5.0 days vs. 5.5 days; p = 0.430).

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis is feasible and safe when performed by surgical residents with no prior open appendectomy experience. It may be performed as the first procedure during surgical training with no adverse effect on patients.