Randomized, single-blinded trial of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: effects on postoperative analgesia

Optimal Post-Operative Nalbuphine Dose Regimen: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Patients with Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background and Objectives: Optimal opioid analgesia is an excellent analgesia that does not present unexpected adverse effects. Nalbuphine, acting on the opioid receptor as a partial mu antagonist and kappa agonist, is considered a suitable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, we aim to investigate the appropriate dosage of nalbuphine for post-operative pain management in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly categorized into low, medium, and high nalbuphine groups. In each group, a patient control device for post-operative pain control was programed with a low (0.05 mg/kg), medium (0.10 mg/kg), or high (0.20 mg/kg) nalbuphine dose as a loading dose and each bolus dose with a lockout interval of 7 min and without background infusion. Primary and secondary outcomes included the post-operative pain scale and nalbuphine consumption, and episodes of post-operative opioid-related adverse events and satisfactory scores. Results: The low-dosage group presented a higher initial self-reported pain score in comparison to the other two groups for the two hours post-op (p = 0.039) but presented lower nalbuphine consumption than the other two groups for four hours post-op (p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in the analysis of the satisfactory score and adverse events. Conclusions: An appropriate administration of nalbuphine could be 0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg at the initial four hours; this formula could be modified to a lower dosage (0.05 mg/kg) in the post-operative management of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Single port surgery in pediatric age: report of first 300 cases

BACKGROUND

In recent years, evolution of surgery has led to laparoscopy and then to single port surgery. In pediatric age, few papers have been published about single port procedures; in particular, no one has described the use of the Octoport device (Frankenman International Ltd., Suzhou, China). We present our experience using a new device.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of first 300 cases was performed collecting the data of all patients treated with Octoport device from October 2017 to September 2021. Epidemiological data, diagnosis, operative times, and complications were analyzed. Postoperative pain was compared with standard laparoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 300 procedures were performed during the study period. The age range was 1-17 years. The conversion rate was 3.6% (11 patients) including both conversion to traditional laparoscopy and to laparotomy. Pain management was comparable to traditional laparoscopy. The complication rate was 3.6%, in one case leading to re-do surgery. All the cases in our Unit were successfully completed, with complications mainly related to the original pathology rather than to the technique itself.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve for Octoport use proved to be functional as for standard laparoscopy. In this study, surgical indications for the use of single port laparoscopy were defined, discerning favorable and unfavorable procedures. A proven superiority of this technique over traditional laparoscopy is yet to be defined, but Octoport has proved to be a safe and easy tool to reduce invasiveness of procedures in pediatric surgery with better cosmetic results.

Systematic Review of Definitions and Outcome Measures for Postoperative Ileus and Return of Bowel Function after Abdominal Surgery in Children

This review aims to objectify which definitions and outcome measures are used for the return of bowel function and postoperative ileus in children. PubMed and Embase were systematically searched from inception to December 17, 2020. Prospective studies conducted in children (aged 0-18 years) undergoing gastrointestinal surgery which reported on definitions and/or outcome measures for post-operative ileus or return of bowel function were evaluated. Definitions and outcome measures were extracted. From 4,027 references, 71 articles were included. From the 17 articles mentioning postoperative ileus, 8 (47%) provided a definition. In total, 34 outcome measures were used and 12 were unique. "Abdominal distension" was the most reported (41%) measure. In 41%, the outcome measures only described the return of gastric motility, while 18% described the return of intestinal motility. The return of bowel function was mentioned in 67 articles, none provided a definition. In total, 133 outcome measures were used and 37 were unique. Time to oral intake was the most reported (14%) measure. In 49%, the outcome measures only described the return of gastric motility, while 10% described the return of intestinal motility. High variation in definitions and outcome measures has limited the generalizability of research into postoperative bowel function in children. Without standardization, it will be impossible to compare research results and evaluate treatments. In children, the return of gastric motility seemingly should get more focus compared to adults. Therefore, we believe that a definition of postoperative ileus with an accompanying core outcome set, developed by a multidisciplinary team, specifically for children is required.

Laparoscopic versus Open Pediatric Surgery: Three Decades of Comparative Studies

INTRODUCTION

 Despite its wide acceptance, the superiority of laparoscopic versus open pediatric surgery has remained controversial. There is still a call for well-founded evidence. We reviewed the literature on studies published in the last three decades and dealing with advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy compared to open surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Studies comparing laparoscopic versus open abdominal procedures in children were searched in PubMed/MEDLINE. Reports on upper and lower gastrointestinal as hepatobiliary surgery and on surgery of pancreas and spleen were included. Advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery were analyzed for different types of procedures. Complications were categorized using the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

 A total of 239 studies dealing with 19 types of procedures and outcomes in 929,157 patients were analyzed. We identified 26 randomized controlled trials (10.8%) and 213 comparative studies (89.2%). The most frequently reported advantage of laparoscopy was shorter hospital stay in 60.4% of studies. Longer operative time was the most frequently reported disadvantage of laparoscopy in 52.7% of studies. Clavien-Dindo grade I to III complications (mild-moderate) were less frequently identified in laparoscopic compared to open procedures (80.3% of studies). Grade-IV complications (severe) were less frequently reported after laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis and more frequently after laparoscopic Kasai's portoenterostomy. We identified a decreased frequency of reporting on advantages after laparoscopy and increased reporting on disadvantages for all surgery types over the decades.

CONCLUSION

 Laparoscopic compared with open pediatric surgery seems to be beneficial in most types of procedures. The number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remains limited. However, the number of reports on disadvantages increased during the past decades.

Recovery of bowel function after transperitoneal or retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty. A multi-center study

AIM

To document the recovery of bowel function (BF) in children after transperitoneal (TP) or retroperitoneal (RP) laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

METHODS

Data were obtained retrospectively from four centers between 2008 and 2019 for TP (n = 51) and RP (n = 58). Each surgeon chose which technique to perform.

RESULTS

Subject demographics were not significantly different. Differences in operative times were not significant (RP: 241 min versus TP: 225 min). Mean duration/requirement for postoperative epidural/intravenous analgesia were not significantly different (TP: 1.4 days versus RP: 1.3 days) and (TP: 66.7% versus RP: 67.2%), respectively. Postoperative nasogastric (NG) intubation was more common in RP (TP: 19.6% versus RP: 44.8%; p < .05). NG aspiration (TP: 0.15 mL/kg/hr versus RP: 0.16 mL/kg/hr), nausea (TP: 31.4% versus RP: 17.2%), and vomiting (TP: 19.6% versus RP: 15.5%) were not significantly different. There were no perioperative complications (including ileus). Abdominal distention was problematic in one case per group (TP: 2.0% versus RP: 1.7%). Times for oral liquid (TP: 0.69 day versus RP: 0.83 day), solid food (TP: 0.88 day versus RP 1.07 days), and the first bowel movement (TP: 2.86 days versus RP: 2.79 days), were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

BF recovery would appear to be consistent, independent of technique.

Surgical site infection after open and laparoscopic surgery in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the most common healthcare-associated infections in patients undergoing surgery. Various randomised control trials (RCTs) indicate that laparoscopic procedures can be associated with better outcomes compared to open procedures. However, how open versus laparoscopic approaches compare across various paediatric procedures with respect to SSI rate remains poorly defined. In this review, we examined RCTs that directly compare SSI rates after open versus laparoscopic operations for appendicitis, gastro-esophageal reflux, inguinal hernia, and pyloric stenosis. MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for RCTs comparing four types of open versus laparoscopic operations in children. The operations included appendectomy, fundoplication for gastro-esophageal reflux, inguinal hernia repair, or pyloromyotomy. 364 records were identified and screened, 54 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 17 RCTs were included in the analysis. SSI rate was the primary outcome. Operative time and length of stay (LOS) were the secondary outcomes. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Laparoscopic appendectomy had a lower SSI rate than open appendectomy (odds ratio of 2.22 [1.19, 4.15] p = 0.01). Laparoscopic fundoplication for gastro-esophageal reflux, inguinal hernia repair, or pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis were not associated with lower SSI rate compared to open surgery. Operative time was shorter in open fundoplication (- 71.22 min [- 89.79,  - 52.65] p < 0.00001) than laparoscopic fundoplication. There was no significant difference in operative time of any of the other procedures. There was no significant difference in LOS between open and laparoscopic procedures for all types of operations analysed. Based on the findings of this review, it is recommended to utilise the laparoscopic approach over the open approach to reduce SSI risk in paediatric appendectomy.

Advances and Trends in Pediatric Minimally Invasive Surgery

As many meta-analyses comparing pediatric minimally invasive to open surgery can be found in the literature, the aim of this review is to summarize the current state of minimally invasive pediatric surgery and specifically focus on the trends and developments which we expect in the upcoming years. Print and electronic databases were systematically searched for specific keywords, and cross-link searches with references found in the literature were added. Full-text articles were obtained, and eligibility criteria were applied independently. Pediatric minimally invasive surgery is a wide field, ranging from minimally invasive fetal surgery over microlaparoscopy in newborns to robotic surgery in adolescents. New techniques and devices, like natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), single-incision and endoscopic surgery, as well as the artificial uterus as a backup for surgery in preterm fetuses, all contribute to the development of less invasive procedures for children. In spite of all promising technical developments which will definitely change the way pediatric surgeons will perform minimally invasive procedures in the upcoming years, one must bear in mind that only hard data of prospective randomized controlled and double-blind trials can validate whether these techniques and devices really improve the surgical outcome of our patients.

First national survey on opioids prescribing practices of Canadian pediatric surgeons

PURPOSE

Prescription opioid misuse has become a public health concern globally. In Canada, little is known about the national prescription patterns in children. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the opioid prescribing practices of pediatric surgeons in Canada.

METHODS

Following ethical approval, an electronic questionnaire was administered to all pediatric surgeons currently practicing in Canada. Questions included surgeon practice information, patterns of opioid prescription at discharge based on the type of surgery, type of opioid prescribed, and availability of training for surgeons/families.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight questionnaires were completed (response rate: 84%) by surgeons from 8 out of 8 Canadian provinces with pediatric surgery coverage. 33% of responders prescribed opioids (most commonly morphine) for day surgeries and 73% of Pediatric Surgeons prescribed opioids for major surgeries. Most responders (84%) declared that at their institution there was no formal training for residents/fellows in pain control and opioid prescribing. Similarly, 57% reported no education for families about opioids at discharge.

CONCLUSION

This first national survey on opioid prescribing practices across Canada reveals that opioids were prescribed to pediatric patients following a broad range of minor and major surgical procedures. Moreover, there seems to be a lack of education for surgeons and families about opioid use.

TYPE OF STUDY

Descriptive, cross-sectional, practice survey.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

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.

Factors affecting recovery of postoperative bowel function after pediatric laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laparoscopic pediatric surgery allows a rapid postoperative rehabilitation and hospital discharge. However, the optimal postoperative pain management preserving advantages of this surgical technique remains to be determined. This study aimed to identify factors affecting the postoperative recovery of bowel function after laparoscopic surgery in children.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of factors affecting recovery of bowel function in children and infants undergoing laparoscopic surgery between January 1, 2009 and September 30, 2009, was performed. Factors included were: Age, weight, extent of surgery (extensive, regional or local), chronic pain (sickle cell disease or chronic intestinal inflammatory disease), American Society of Anaesthesiologists status, postoperative analgesia (ketamine, morphine, nalbuphine, paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], nefopam, regional analgesia) both in the Postanesthesia Care Unit and in the surgical ward; and surgical complications. Data analysis used classification and regression tree analysis (CART) with a 10-fold cross validation.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty six patients were included in the analysis. Recovery of bowel function depended upon: The extent of surgery, the occurrence of postoperative surgical complications, the administration of postoperative morphine in the surgical ward, the coadministration of paracetamol and NSAIDs and/or nefopam in the surgical ward and the emergency character of the surgery. The CART method generated a decision tree with eight terminal nodes. The percentage of explained variability of the model and the cross validation were 58% and 49%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Multimodal analgesia using nonopioid analgesia that allows decreasing postoperative morphine consumption should be considered for the speed of bowel function recovery after laparoscopic pediatric surgery.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopy in pediatric surgery: Implementation in Canada and supporting evidence

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the diffusion of laparoscopy usage in Canadian pediatric centers and the relationship between uptake of laparoscopic surgery and the level of evidence supporting its use.

METHODS

National data on four pediatric laparoscopic operations (appendectomy, pyloromyotomy, cholecystectomy, splenectomy) were analyzed using the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Database (2002-2013). The highest level of evidence to support the use of each procedure was identified from Cochrane, Embase, and Pubmed databases. Chi-square test for trend was used to determine significance and time to plateau.

RESULTS

There were 28,843 operations (open: 12,048; laparoscopic: 16,795). Use of laparoscopic procedures increased over time (p<0.0001). A plateau was reached for cholecystectomy (2006), splenectomy (2007), and appendectomy (2012), but not for pyloromyotomy. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy in 2013 remains less diffused than the other procedures (p<0.0001). Laparoscopic appendectomy and pyloromyotomy are supported by level-1a evidence in children, whereas cholecystectomy and splenectomy are supported by level-1a evidence in adults but level-3 in children.

CONCLUSIONS

In Canada, it has taken a long time to reach high-level implementation of laparoscopic surgery in children. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy first reached plateau, whereas laparoscopic pyloromyotomy continues to increase but remains low despite high level of evidence in support of its usage compared to open surgery.

Automated Assessment of Children's Postoperative Pain Using Computer Vision

BACKGROUND

Current pain assessment methods in youth are suboptimal and vulnerable to bias and underrecognition of clinical pain. Facial expressions are a sensitive, specific biomarker of the presence and severity of pain, and computer vision (CV) and machine-learning (ML) techniques enable reliable, valid measurement of pain-related facial expressions from video. We developed and evaluated a CVML approach to measure pain-related facial expressions for automated pain assessment in youth.

METHODS

A CVML-based model for assessment of pediatric postoperative pain was developed from videos of 50 neurotypical youth 5 to 18 years old in both endogenous/ongoing and exogenous/transient pain conditions after laparoscopic appendectomy. Model accuracy was assessed for self-reported pain ratings in children and time since surgery, and compared with by-proxy parent and nurse estimates of observed pain in youth.

RESULTS

Model detection of pain versus no-pain demonstrated good-to-excellent accuracy (Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.84-0.94) in both ongoing and transient pain conditions. Model detection of pain severity demonstrated moderate-to-strong correlations (r = 0.65-0.86 within; r = 0.47-0.61 across subjects) for both pain conditions. The model performed equivalently to nurses but not as well as parents in detecting pain versus no-pain conditions, but performed equivalently to parents in estimating pain severity. Nurses were more likely than the model to underestimate youth self-reported pain ratings. Demographic factors did not affect model performance.

CONCLUSIONS

CVML pain assessment models derived from automatic facial expression measurements demonstrated good-to-excellent accuracy in binary pain classifications, strong correlations with patient self-reported pain ratings, and parent-equivalent estimation of children's pain levels over typical pain trajectories in youth after appendectomy.

Outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses of appendicitis treatments in children: a systematic review

Background

Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Despite this, there is no core outcome set (COS) described for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children with appendicitis and hence no consensus regarding outcome selection, definition and reporting. We aimed to identify outcomes currently reported in studies of paediatric appendicitis.

Methods

Using a defined, sensitive search strategy, we identified RCTs and systematic reviews (SRs) of treatment interventions in children with appendicitis. Included studies were all in English and investigated the effect of one or more treatment interventions in children with acute appendicitis or undergoing appendicectomy for presumed acute appendicitis. Studies were reviewed and data extracted by two reviewers. Primary (if defined) and all other outcomes were recorded and assigned to the core areas ‘Death’, ‘Pathophysiological Manifestations’, ‘Life Impact’, ‘Resource Use’ and ‘Adverse Events’, using OMERACT Filter 2.0.

Results

A total of 63 studies met the inclusion criteria reporting outcomes from 51 RCTs and nine SRs. Only 25 RCTs and four SRs defined a primary outcome. A total of 115 unique and different outcomes were identified. RCTs reported a median of nine outcomes each (range 1 to 14). The most frequently reported outcomes were wound infection (43 RCTs, nine SRs), intra-peritoneal abscess (41 RCTs, seven SRs) and length of stay (35 RCTs, six SRs) yet all three were reported in just 25 RCTs and five SRs. Common outcomes had multiple different definitions or were frequently not defined. Although outcomes were reported within all core areas, just one RCT and no SR reported outcomes for all core areas. Outcomes assigned to the ‘Death’ and ‘Life Impact’ core areas were reported least frequently (in six and 15 RCTs respectively).

Conclusions

There is a wide heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes in paediatric appendicitis, and little overlap in outcomes used across studies. A paucity of studies report patient relevant outcomes within the ‘Life Impact’ core area. These factors preclude meaningful evidence synthesis, and pose challenges to designing prospective clinical trials and cohort studies. The development of a COS for paediatric appendicitis is warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0783-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy: a population-based study of trends, associations, and outcomes

PURPOSE

We performed a population-based study to analyze the trends, associations, and outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in the Canadian universal health care setting.

METHODS

Children younger than 18years coded for urgent appendectomy in the discharge abstract database of the Canadian Institute of Health Information during 2004-2010 were analyzed. The Cochran-Armitage test, logistic regression, and quintile regression were used to perform the necessary analyses.

RESULTS

41,405 children were studied. LA incidence steadily increased from 28.8% to 66.4%, p<.0001. Conversion rates significantly decreased, while LA for perforated appendicitis significantly increased. LA occurred significantly less in younger patients [OR 0.24 (<5years), OR 0.45 (6-11 years)], males [OR 0.79], and operations by a general surgeon [OR 0.33]. Rural domicile, socioeconomic status, and hospital type had no effect. LA decreased hospital stay for simple appendicitis by one day beginning in 2006, and by variable durations for perforated appendicitis throughout the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of LA in Canada has more than doubled. Older children, females, and patients treated by pediatric surgeons are more likely to receive LA, while domicile, socioeconomic status, and hospital type have no effect. LA reduced hospital stay for both simple and perforated appendicitis.

Laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original review, published in Issue 1, 2011, of The Cochrane Library. Acute lower abdominal pain is common, and making a diagnosis is particularly challenging in premenopausal women, as ovulation and menstruation symptoms overlap with symptoms of appendicitis, early pregnancy complications and pelvic infection. A management strategy involving early laparoscopy could potentially provide a more accurate diagnosis, earlier treatment and reduced risk of complications.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and harms of laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age.

SEARCH METHODS

The Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and CINAHL were searched (October 2013). The International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) was also searched. No new studies were included in this updated version.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included women of childbearing age who presented with acute lower abdominal pain, non-specific lower abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis were included. Trials were included if they evaluated laparoscopy with open appendicectomy, or laparoscopy with a wait and see strategy. Study selection was carried out by two review authors independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently extracted by two review authors and the risk of bias assessed. We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. A summary of findings table was prepared using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 12 studies including 1020 participants were incorporated into the review. These studies had low to moderate risk of bias, mainly because allocation concealment or methods of sequence generation were not adequately reported. In addition, it was not clear whether follow-up was similar for the treatment groups. The index test was incorporated as a reference standard in the laparoscopy group, and differential verification or partial verification bias may have occurred in most RCTs. Overall the quality of the evidence was low to moderate for most outcomes, as per the GRADE approach.Laparoscopy was compared with open appendicectomy in eight RCTs. Laparoscopy was associated with an increased rate of specific diagnoses (seven RCTs, 561 participants; odds ratio (OR) 4.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.50 to 6.71; I(2) = 18%), but no evidence was found of reduced rates for any adverse events (eight RCTs, 623 participants; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.10; I(2) = 0%). A meta-analysis of seven studies found a significant difference favouring the laparoscopic procedure in the rate of removal of normal appendix (seven RCTs, 475 participants; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.24; I(2) = 0%).Laparoscopic diagnosis versus a 'wait and see' strategy was investigated in four RCTs. A significant difference favoured laparoscopy in terms of rate of specific diagnoses (four RCTs, 395 participants; OR 6.07, 95% CI 1.85 to 29.88; I(2) = 79%), but no evidence suggested a difference in rates of adverse events (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.67; I(2) = 0%).  

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that laparoscopy in women with acute lower abdominal pain, non-specific lower abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis led to a higher rate of specific diagnoses being made and a lower rate of removal of normal appendices compared with open appendicectomy only. Hospital stays were shorter. No evidence showed an increase in adverse events when any of these strategies were used.

Short term and long term results after open vs. laparoscopic appendectomy in childhood and adolescence: a subgroup analysis

Background

A comparative study was performed to compare quality of life after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children and adolescents in a German General Hospital. The same study population was re-evaluated regarding their quality of life several years after operation.

Methods

Children and adolescents (n = 158) who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between 1999 and 2001 were retrospectively analysed. Seven years after surgery those patients were interviewed applying a SF-36 questionnaire regarding their quality of life.

Results

For short term outcomes there was a trend towards reduced specific postoperative complications in the laparoscopically operated group (9.3 vs. 10.7%). Significantly more patients in the laparoscopic group would recommend the operation procedure to family members or friends than in the open group. Among the evaluated patients there was a significantly higher satisfaction concerning size and appearance of their scars in the laparoscopic group. The results of the evaluation in the eight categories of the SF-36 showed similar results in both groups.

Conclusions

More patients with laparoscopic appendectomy appeared to be satisfied with their operation method as becomes evident by a higher recommendation rate and a higher satisfaction concerning their scars.

Nahtinsuffizienz intestinaler Anastomosen: Endoskopische und laparoskopische Therapieoptionen

<b><i>Hintergrund: </i></b>Anastomoseninsuffizienzen stellen die schwerwiegendste septische Komplikation nach viszeralchirurgischen Eingriffen dar. Neben der chirurgischen Therapie sind zunehmend endoskopische Behandlungsoptionen möglich. <b><i>Methode: </i></b>Literaturübersicht. <b><i>Ergebnisse: </i></b>Therapieoptionen von Anastomoseninsuffizienzen sind abhängig von der klinischen Symptomatik, der Art der Anastomose, der Defektgröße, den lokalen Gewebeverhältnissen sowie dem Zeitpunkt der Diagnose. Bei einer Nekrose oder Minderdurchblutung der Viszeralorgane müssen diese operativ reseziert werden. Prinzipiell sind alle operativen Revisionseingriffe auch laparoskopisch durchführbar. Bei erhaltener Gewebeperfusion können die Leckagen lokal übernäht oder endoskopisch verschlossen werden. Die Ergebnisse für die Stenttherapie nach Ösophagus- und Magenresektionen sind für moderne Stents sehr Erfolg versprechend. Im Gegensatz dazu sind die Ergebnisse der endoskopischen Stenttherapie bei Insuffizienz nach kolorektalen Eingriffen enttäuschend; dafür steht hier mit der Schwammtherapie eine vielversprechende endoskopische Alternative zur Verfügung. <b><i>Schlussfolgerung: </i></b>Die aktuellen Daten zeigen, dass neue laparoskopische und endoskopische Optionen zur Therapie von Anastomoseninsuffizienzen bestehen, die jedoch noch in prospektiven und randomisierten Studien evaluiert werden müssen.

Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis

PURPOSE

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for relevant papers published between January 1990 and February 2012. We analyzed 22 outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis.

RESULTS

We identified 39 papers reporting results from randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for acute appendicitis. Our meta-analysis included 5,896 patients with acute appendicitis; 2,847 had undergone laparoscopic surgery, and 3,049 had undergone open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with longer operative time (by 13.12 min). However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis was associated with earlier resumption of liquid and solid intake; shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay; a reduction in dose numbers of parenteral and oral analgesics; earlier return to normal activity, work, and normal life; decreased occurrence of wound infection; a better cosmesis; and similar hospital charges.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery may now be the standard treatment for acute appendicitis.

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy in children

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy (MIA) is the criterion standard for removal of small adrenal tumors in adults. The purpose of this review was to determine the place of MIA in children.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic review of the pediatric and adult literature about MIA, focusing on the technique and indications.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy appears superior to open adrenalectomy for small tumors. The potential advantages of MIA are appealing for postoperative pain, risk of intestinal obstruction, and quality of scars. The most common approach is the transperitoneal lateral laparoscopy, which allows for a large working space. For small tumors or for bilateral adrenalectomy, the prone retroperitoneoscopy is a promising new technique. In children, the learning curve is an issue because the indications are rare. The most common indication is neuroblastoma without image-defined surgical risk factors. The incidence of local recurrence is low, but the follow-up is short in most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy is promising for removal of small adrenal tumors. Long-term follow-up is required to evaluate the efficacy of MIA in neuroblastomas. Benign diseases are excellent candidates for this minimally invasive technique.

Clinical outcome of a randomized controlled blinded trial of open versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication in infants and children

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcome and endocrine response in children who were randomized to open or laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication using minimization.

BACKGROUND

It is assumed that laparoscopic surgery is associated with less pain, quicker recovery and dampened endocrine response. Few randomized studies have been performed in children.

METHODS

Parents gave informed consent, and this study was approved and registered (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00231543). Anesthesia, postoperative analgesia and feeding were standardized. Parents and staff were blinded to allocation. Blood was taken for markers of endocrine response.

RESULTS

Twenty open and 19 laparoscopic patients were comparable with respect to age, weight, neurological status, and presence of congenital anomalies. Median time to full feeds was 2 days in both groups (P = 0.85); hospital stay was 4.5 days in the open group versus 5.0 days in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.57). Pain was adequately managed in both groups and there was no difference in morphine requirements. Median follow-up was 22 (range 12-34) months. Dysphagia, recurrence and need for redo fundoplication were not different between groups; retching was higher after open surgery (56% vs. 6%; P = 0.003). Insulin levels decreased at 24 hours, and was 54% lower (P = 0.02) after laparoscopy. Cortisol was elevated immediately postoperative, but was 42% lower (P = 0.02) after laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the postoperative analgesia requirements and recovery. Laparoscopy decreased insulin levels to a greater extent, but caused less of a response in cortisol. Early postoperative outcome confirmed equal efficacy, but fewer children with retching after laparoscopy.

Laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age

BACKGROUND

Acute lower abdominal pain is common and making a diagnosis is particularly challenging in premenopausal woman as ovulation and menstruation symptoms overlap with the symptoms of appendicitis and pelvic infection. A management strategy involving early laparoscopy could potentially provide a more accurate diagnosis, earlier treatment and reduced risk of complications.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and harms of laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The  Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and CINHAL were searched (to April 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included women of childbearing age who presented with acute lower abdominal pain, nonspecific lower abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently extracted by two authors and the risk of bias assessed.

MAIN RESULTS

Laparoscopy was compared with open appendicectomy in eight RCTs. Laparoscopy was associated with an increased rate of specific diagnoses (7 RCTs, 561 participants; OR 4.10, 95% CI 2.50 to 6.71; I(2) 18%) but there was no evidence of reduced rate for any adverse event (8 RCTs, 623 participants; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.10; I(2) 0%).Laparoscopic diagnosis versus a 'wait and see' strategy was investigated in four RCTs. There was a significant difference favouring laparoscopy in the rate of specific diagnoses (4 RCTs, 395 participants; OR 6.07, 95% CI 1.85 to 29.88; I(2) 79%) but there was no evidence of a difference in the rates of adverse events (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.67; I(2) 0%).  

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of laparoscopy in women with nonspecific abdominal pain and suspected appendicitis include a higher rate of specific diagnoses being made and a lower rate of removal of normal appendices compared to open appendicectomy only. Hospital stays were shorter. There was no evidence of an increase in adverse events with any of the strategies.

Pediatric laparoscopy: Facts and factitious claims

Background:

Pediatric laparoscopy (LS) is claimed to be superior to open surgery (OS). This review questions the scientific veracity of this assertion by systematic analysis of published evidences comparing LS versus OS in infants and children.

Materials and Methods:

Search of PubMed data base and the available literature on pediatric LS is analyzed.

Results:

One hundred and eight articles out of a total of 426 papers were studied in detail.

Conclusions:

High quality evidences indicate that LS is, at the best, as invasive as OS; and is at the worst, more invasive than conventional surgery. There are no high quality evidences to suggest that LS is minimally invasive, economically profitable and is associated with fewer complications than OS. Evidences are equally distributed for and against the benefits of LS regarding postoperative pain. Proof of cosmetic superiority of LS or otherwise is not available. The author concludes that pediatric laparoscopy, at the best, is simply comparable to laparotomy and its superiority over the latter could not be sustained on the basis of available scientific evidences. Benefits of laparoscopy appear to recede with younger age. Concerns are raised on the quick adoption, undue promotion and frequent misuse of laparoscopy in children.

Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Although laparoscopic surgery has been available for a long time and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been performed universally, it is still not clear whether open appendectomy (OA) or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the most appropriate surgical approach to acute appendicitis. The purpose of this work is to compare the therapeutic effects and safety of laparoscopic and conventional "open" appendectomy by means of a meta-analysis.

Methods

A meta-analysis was performed of all randomized controlled trials published in English that compared LA and OA in adults and children between 1990 and 2009. Calculations were made of the effect sizes of: operating time, postoperative length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, resumption of diet, complications rates, and conversion to open surgery. The effect sizes were then pooled by a fixed or random-effects model.

Results

Forty-four randomized controlled trials with 5292 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Operating time was 12.35 min longer for LA (95% CI: 7.99 to 16.72, p < 0.00001). Hospital stay after LA was 0.60 days shorter (95% CI: -0.85 to -0.36, p < 0.00001). Patients returned to their normal activity 4.52 days earlier after LA (95% CI: -5.95 to -3.10, p < 0.00001), and resumed their diet 0.34 days earlier(95% CI: -0.46 to -0.21, p < 0.00001). Pain after LA on the first postoperative day was significantly less (p = 0.008). The overall conversion rate from LA to OA was 9.51%. With regard to the rate of complications, wound infection after LA was definitely reduced (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.59, p < 0.00001), while postoperative ileus was not significantly reduced(OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.47, p = 0.71). However, intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), intraoperative bleeding and urinary tract infection (UIT) after LA, occurred slightly more frequently(OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.43, p = 0.05; OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.54 to 4.48, p = 0.41; OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.58 to 5.29, p = 0.32).

Conclusion

LA provides considerable benefits over OA, including a shorter length of hospital stay, less postoperative pain, earlier postoperative recovery, and a lower complication rate. Furthermore, over the study period it was obvious that there had been a trend toward fewer differences in operating time for the two procedures. Although LA was associated with a slight increase in the incidence of IAA, intraoperative bleeding and UIT, it is a safe procedure. It may be that the widespread use of LA is due to its better therapeutic effect.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis has been proposed to have advantages over conventional surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic and therapeutic effects of laparoscopic and conventional 'open' surgery.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CNKI, SciSearch, study registries, and the congress proceedings of endoscopic surgical societies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials comparing laparoscopic (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA) in adults or children. Studies comparing immediate OA versus diagnostic laparoscopy (followed by LA or OA if necessary) were separately identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Missing information or data was requested from the authors. We used odds ratios (OR), relative risks (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 67 studies, of which 56 compared LA (with or without diagnostic laparoscopy) vs. OA in adults. Wound infections were less likely after LA than after OA (OR 0.43; CI 0.34 to 0.54), but the incidence of intraabdominal abscesses was increased (OR 1.87; CI 1.19 to 2.93). The duration of surgery was 10 minutes (CI 6 to 15) longer for LA. Pain on day 1 after surgery was reduced after LA by 8 mm (CI 5 to 11 mm) on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Hospital stay was shortened by 1.1 day (CI 0.7 to 1.5). Return to normal activity, work, and sport occurred earlier after LA than after OA. While the operation costs of LA were significantly higher, the costs outside hospital were reduced. Seven studies on children were included, but the results do not seem to be much different when compared to adults. Diagnostic laparoscopy reduced the risk of a negative appendectomy, but this effect was stronger in fertile women (RR 0.20; CI 0.11 to 0.34) as compared to unselected adults (RR 0.37; CI 0.13 to 1.01).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In those clinical settings where surgical expertise and equipment are available and affordable, diagnostic laparoscopy and LA (either in combination or separately) seem to have various advantages over OA. Some of the clinical effects of LA, however, are small and of limited clinical relevance. In spite of the mediocre quality of the available research data, we would generally recommend to use laparoscopy and LA in patients with suspected appendicitis unless laparoscopy itself is contraindicated or not feasible. Especially young female, obese, and employed patients seem to benefit from LA.

Comparison of outcomes after laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis at 222 ACS NSQIP hospitals

BACKGROUND

The benefit of laparoscopic (LA) versus open (OA) appendectomy, particularly for complicated appendicitis, remains unclear. Our objectives were to assess 30-day outcomes after LA versus OA for acute appendicitis and complicated appendicitis, determine the incidence of specific outcomes after appendectomy, and examine factors influencing the utilization and duration of the operative approach with multi-institutional clinical data.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database (2005-2008), patients were identified who underwent emergency appendectomy for acute appendicitis at 222 participating hospitals. Regression models, which included propensity score adjustment to minimize the influence of treatment selection bias, were constructed. Models assessed the association between surgical approach (LA vs OA) and risk-adjusted overall morbidity, surgical site infection (SSI), serious morbidity, and serious morbidity/mortality, as well as individual complications in patients with acute appendicitis and complicated appendicitis. The relationships between operative approach, operative duration, and extended duration of stay with hospital academic affiliation were also examined.

RESULTS

Of 32,683 patients, 24,969 (76.4%) underwent LA and 7,714 (23.6%) underwent OA. Patients who underwent OA were significantly older with more comorbidities compared with those who underwent LA. Patients treated with LA were less likely to experience an overall morbidity (4.5% vs 8.8%; odds ratio [OR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.68) or a SSI (3.3% vs 6.7%; OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.50-0.65) but not a serious morbidity (2.6% vs 4.2%; OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.01) or a serious morbidity/mortality (2.6% vs 4.3%; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74-1.01) compared with those who underwent OA. All patients treated with LA were significantly less likely to develop individual infectious complications except for organ space SSI. Among patients with complicated appendicitis, organ space SSI was significantly more common after laparoscopic appendectomy (6.3% vs 4.8%; OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05-1.73). For all patients with acute appendicitis, those treated at academic-affiliated versus community hospitals were equally likely to undergo LA versus OA (77.0% vs 77.3%; P = .58). Operative duration at academic centers was significantly longer for both LA and OA (LA, 47 vs 38 minutes [P < .0001]; OA, 49 vs 44 minutes [P < .0001]). Median duration of stay after LA was 1 day at both academic-affiliated and community hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Within ACS NSQIP hospitals, LA is associated with lower overall morbidity in selected patients. However, patients with complicated appendicitis may have a greater risk of organ space SSI after LA. Academic affiliation does not seem to influence the operative approach. However, LA is associated with similar durations of stay but slightly greater operative times than OA at academic versus community hospitals.

Neonatal endosurgical congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes of open and endosurgical neonatal congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) repairs.

BACKGROUND

Historically a surgical emergency, neonatal CDH repair is now deferred pending stabilization of characteristically labile cardiopulmonary physiology. Usually accomplished via laparotomy, surgical repair may acutely worsen lung function; conversely, by reducing the visceral hernia, surgery might improve it. Theoretically, endosurgical repair could minimize deleterious effects of surgery while garnering benefits from decompressing the CDH lung. As endosurgical repair gains popularity, it is important to investigate whether or not minimally-invasive neonatal CDH repair has benefits.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Trials databases for studies comparing open with endosurgical CDH repair. Non-neonatal series and reports without comparison groups were excluded. References from papers and conference proceedings were also hand searched. Meta-analysis used a fixed effects model and was reported in accordance with PRISMA.

RESULTS

We included 3 studies (1 unpublished; none randomized); all compared thoracoscopic and open CDH repair and together described 143 patients. All studies had limitations, including use of historical controls. Demographics, CDH sidedness, APGAR and associated anomaly prevalence were similar between groups. For endosurgical repair, recurrence was higher (RR: 3.2 [1.1, 9.3], P = 0.03) and operative time longer (WMD 50 minutes [32, 69], P < 0.00001). Survival and patch usage were not different between open and endosurgical groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Neonatal thoracoscopic CDH repair has greater recurrence rates and operative times but similar survival and patch usage compared with open surgery. A prospective registry for all such cases would guide development of trials (Stage 2b; IDEAL recommendations).

A single-blinded, randomized comparison of laparoscopic versus open hernia repair in children

OBJECTIVE

The role of laparoscopic surgery in pediatric inguinal hernia repair is unclear. We aimed to compare day-case laparoscopic hernia repair with open repair.

METHODS

A prospective, single-blinded randomized study in children aged 4 months to 16 years with unilateral inguinal hernia was performed. The primary outcome measure was the time to normal daily activities after surgery. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative pain, time in the operation room, results, and complications.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were enrolled (laparoscopic hernia repair: 47, open repair: 42). The mean number of days to normal activity after laparoscopic hernia repair and open repair was 2.4 and 2.5, respectively. Thirty-seven (79%) patients with laparoscopic hernia repair and 20 (42%) with open repair required rescue analgesia postoperatively. The median pain score in the second postoperative morning was significantly higher after laparoscopic hernia repair. The median times in the operation room for laparoscopic hernia repair and open repair were 63 and 38 minutes, respectively. Surgical and cosmetic results were similar at up to 2 years' follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Recovery and outcome were similar after open repair and laparoscopic hernia repair in children. Laparoscopic hernia repair was associated with increased theater time and postoperative pain.

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic heminephrectomy in duplex kidney in infants and children: a 15-year experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy in children remains a complex technique with limited diffusion among the paediatric surgical community.

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience with laparoscopic heminephrectomy in duplex kidneys after a 15-yr practise of the technique in children and infants.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Forty-eight children with retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (36 upper-pole nephrectomies [UPN] and 12 lower-pole nephrectomies [LPN]) were retrospectively included in this single-institution study. Median age at surgery was 8.6 mo (range 1.5-89), with a policy of early surgical intervention for UPN in cases involving a massively dilated upper tract.

INTERVENTION

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for duplex kidney in lateral position (n=31) and prone in the last 17 cases.

MEASUREMENTS

We assessed intraoperative and postoperative morbidity. Follow-up (median 14 mo, range 6-125 mo) was based on clinical review and renal ultrasound.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Median duration of surgery was 120 min (range 71-215). Ten procedures (21%) were converted into open surgery, mostly at the beginning of the experience (eight during the first 20 cases, as compared to one conversion in the last 20). Among four converted LPNs, three were converted for difficulties during parenchymal section. Six UPN were converted for difficulties of exposure, with a strong correlation with age: all six were infants, with a median age of 3.25 mo (range 1.5-8 mo). We observed one case (case 4) of functional loss of the remaining lower moiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a high conversion rate during the learning curve for laparoscopic heminephrectomy. Retroperitoneoscopic UPN remains a challenging procedure in children, especially in small infants with very dilated collecting systems. The possibility of vascular damage to the remaining moiety warrants a very cautious dissection of the renal pedicle and should lead to conversion when clear visualization of vascular anatomy is not ascertained.

Choice of approach for appendicectomy: a meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy

Although laparoscopic appendicectomy has been performed since 1983, the optimal approach for appendicectomy is still under debate. A systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials between 1995 and 2006 was undertaken. Studies were analyzed overall and in 2 subgroups (pre-2000 and post-2000) to examine for changes in outcomes with increased laparoscopic experience. Operation time was significantly longer for laparoscopy and hospital stay was shorter. Operating time reduced markedly for laparoscopy on subgroup analysis. The risks of postoperative ileus and wound infection are lower for laparoscopy. Perhaps paradoxically, the risk of intra-abdominal abscess development is significantly raised with laparoscopy with an odds ratio of 2.26 (P=0.0002). Laparoscopic appendicectomy is a safe and effective method of treating acute appendicitis. This meta-analysis shows improvement in the outcomes of laparoscopy with increasing laparoscopic experience but open surgery appears to still confer benefits, especially in terms of intra-abdominal abscess incidence.

Abdominal emergencies: diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has been practiced in the management of emergencies resulting from inflammatory conditions, lumenal obstruction, perforation, vascular occlusion, and trauma. This article identifies and discusses controversial areas in the field, in particular surrounding the efficacy, cost effectiveness, and perceived advantages of laparoscopy in the evaluation and treatment of patients with acute abdominal conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review and commentary on pertinent articles in the English language literature are presented.

RESULTS

Prospective randomized trials have been reported in the treatment of some disorders, but a lack of recommendations that are evidence-based has hindered more widespread usage of laparoscopy in an emergency setting. In addition, concerns have been raised that the creation of capnoperitoneum in the patient with established peritonitis may be detrimental with respect to potentiation of bacteremia and severe sepsis, and experimental studies have yielded conflicting data in this regard.

CONCLUSION

As such issues are resolved, utilization of laparoscopy is likely to increase substantially as expertise is acquired. A minimal-access approach carries less morbidity and may offer other practical advantages in terms of surgical technique and application. When surgical intervention is appropriate, laparoscopy is now preferred for acute biliary disease. Female patients of reproductive age with acute appendicitis may benefit, particularly if there is preoperative diagnostic uncertainty. Selected cases of intestinal obstruction and visceral perforation presenting soon after symptom onset and in whom shock is absent may also be amenable to laparoscopic repair. Its use in the treatment of most trauma patients and patients with generalized peritonitis or hemodynamic instability is not recommended at present.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis: a comparison with open appendectomy

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis remains controversial. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy outcomes for children with perforated appendicitis.

METHODS

Over a 36-month period, 111 children with perforated appendicitis were analyzed in a retrospective review. These children were treated with either laparoscopic (n = 59) or open appendectomy. The primary outcome measures were operative time, length of hospital stay, time to adequate oral intake, wound infection, intraabdominal abscess formation, and bowel obstruction.

RESULTS

The demographic data, presenting symptoms, preoperative laboratory values, and operative times (laparoscopic group, 61 +/- 3 min; open group, 57 +/- 3 were similar for the two groups (p = 0.3). The time to adequate oral intake was 104 +/- 7 h for the laparoscopic group and 127 +/- 12 h for the open group (p = 0.08). The hospitalization time was 189 +/- 14 h for the laparoscopic group, as compared with 210 +/- 15 h for the open group (p = 0.3). The wound infection rate was 6.8% for the laparoscopic group and 23% for the open group (p < 0.05). The wounds of another 29% of the patients were left open at the time of surgery. The postoperative intraabdominal abscess formation rate was 13.6% for the laparoscopic group and 15.4% for the open group. One patient in each group experienced bowel obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy for the children with perforated appendicitis in this study was associated with a significant decrease in the rate of wound infection. Furthermore, on the average, the children who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy tolerated enteral feedings and were discharged from the hospital approximately 24 h earlier than those who had open appendectomy.

Open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy: a critical review

BACKGROUND

The benefit of laparoscopic appendicectomy remains unclear. We have analysed available randomised studies comparing laparoscopic and open appendicectomy regarding their clinical pitfalls and statistical relevance.

METHODS

Thirty eight studies were analysed in terms of the following aspects: A. clinical problems (e.g., expertise of the surgeons, pre- and postoperative antibiotic treatment, definition of complications, blinding of outcomes) and B. statistical problems (e.g., definition of primary and secondary outcomes, power and sample size, statistical methods, confidence intervals, comparability of groups and studies).

RESULTS

Most of the studies have clinical and statistical pitfalls. The most important pitfalls are the uncertain expertise of the operating surgeons, blinding, and the exploratory nature of the studies. Our analysis aims at giving useful information for the appraisal of existing studies and the conduct of further studies. It also gives some preliminary results.

CONCLUSIONS

More than twenty years after Semm performed the first laparoscopic appendicectomy, it is necessary to clarify the superiority of laparoscopic or open appendectomy with well-defined, carefully designed randomised studies.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to use meta-analysis to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy in a pediatric population.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Meta-analysis is a statistical tool that can be used to evaluate the literature in both qualitative and quantitative ways, accounting for variations in characteristics that can influence overall estimate of outcomes of interest. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in a pediatric population has not previously been performed.

METHODS

Comparative studies published between 1992 and 2004 of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children were included. Endpoints were postoperative pyrexia, ileus, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess formation, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies including 6477 children (43% laparoscopic, 57% open) were included. Wound infection was significantly reduced with laparoscopic versus open appendectomy (1.5% versus 5%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.75), as was ileus (1.3% versus 2.8%; OR = 0.5, 95% CI, 0.29-0.86). Intra-abdominal abscess formation was more common following laparoscopic surgery, although this was not statistically significant. Subgroup analysis of randomized trials did not reveal significant difference between the 2 techniques in any of the 4 complications. Operative time was not significantly longer in the laparoscopic group, and postoperative stay was significantly shorter (weighted mean difference, -0.48; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.31). Sensitivity analysis identified lowest heterogeneity when only randomized studies were considered, followed by prospective, recent, and finally large studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that laparoscopic appendectomy in children reduces complications. However, we also see the need for further high-quality randomized trials comparing the 2 techniques, matched not only for age and sex but also for obesity and severity of appendicitis.

Chirurgie cœlioscopique chez l'enfant

In the last two decades, laparoscopy surgery has been progressively adopted to children. Cardiorespiratory changes induced have been understood and controlled. Abdominal and urological surgery have widely benefited from this technique. Immediate postoperative period is simpler. The risk of small bowel obstruction by bands and adhesions is limited. Nevertheless, laparoscopy is not indicated for all pathologies. In neonatal surgery, more studies are necessary. Maybe the future is robotic surgery.

Ten-year experience with pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy--are we getting better?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare our initial (1994-1997) and recent (2001-2003) experiences in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

A 2-year (2001-2003) retrospective chart review of cases of appendicitis was performed and compared with data obtained from 1994 to 1997 cases. Operating and anesthetic times as well as postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Cases of conversion to open appendectomy were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-three LA cases from 2001 to 2003 were compared with 119 cases from 1994 to 1997. Operating time decreased significantly from 58 to 47 minutes in acute appendicitis (AA) and from 80 to 58 minutes in perforated appendicitis (PA). Anesthetic time decreased significantly in both AA (82 to 71 minutes) and PA (106 to 84 minutes). There were significant decreases in the conversion rate in PA (23.4% to 3.5%), although no change was seen in AA. In PA, the incidence of postoperative abscess decreased from 36.2% to 16.5%. There was no significant decrease in length of stay, amount of analgesia used, time to resume regular diet, or incidence of wound infections and bowel obstructions.

CONCLUSIONS

Ten years of experience in LA has resulted in decreases in anesthetic and operating times for AA and PA as well as decreases in the incidence of abscesses and conversion rates.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis has been proposed to have advantages over conventional surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic and therapeutic effects of laparoscopic and conventional 'open' surgery.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciSearch, the congress proceedings of endoscopic surgical societies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials comparing laparoscopic (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA) in adults or children. Studies comparing immediate OA versus diagnostic laparoscopy (followed by LA or OA if necessary) were separately identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Missing information or data was requested from the authors. We used odds ratios (OR), relative risks (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 54 studies, of which 45 compared LA (with or without diagnostic laparoscopy) vs. OA in adults. Wound infections were less likely after LA than after OA (OR 0.45; CI 0.35 to 0.58), but the incidence of intraabdominal abscesses was increased (OR 2.48; CI 1.45 to 4.21). The duration of surgery was 12 minutes (CI 7 to 16) longer for LA. Pain on day 1 after surgery was reduced after LA by 9 mm (CI 5 to 13 mm) on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Hospital stay was shortened by 1.1 day (CI 0.6 to 1.5). Return to normal activity, work, and sport occurred earlier after LA than after OA. While the operation costs of LA were significantly higher, the costs outside hospital were reduced. Five studies on children were included, but the result do not seem to be much different when compared to adults. Diagnostic laparoscopy reduced the risk of a negative appendectomy, but this effect was stronger in fertile women (RR 0.20; CI 0.11 to 0.34) as compared to unselected adults (RR 0.37; CI 0.13 to 1.01).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

In those clinical settings where surgical expertise and equipment are available and affordable, diagnostic laparoscopy and LA (either in combination or separately) seem to have various advantages over OA. Some of the clinical effects of LA, however, are small and of limited clinical relevance. In spite of the mediocre quality of the available research data, we would generally recommend to use laparoscopy and LA in patients with suspected appendicitis unless laparoscopy itself is contraindicated or not feasible. Especially young female, obese, and employed patients seem to benefit from LA.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy

Controversy remains regarding which approach is better, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) or open appendectomy (OA). A 5-year retrospective review of patients undergoing appendectomy was performed to compare the outcomes of LA and OA using standard statistical methods ( P < 0.05). LA was performed in 207 and OA in 100 patients (conversion 6.7%). Females underwent LA more frequently than males (81.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.0001). LA patients were older (30.2 years vs 25.7 years; P = 0.03), with no differences in body mass index (BMI) (27.9 kg/m2 vs 25.5 kg/m2; P = 0.06) or operative times (51.1 minutes vs 51.5 minutes; P = 0.84).’ LA patients required less analgesics (19.2 mg vs 31.5 mg; P = 0.01), and shorter hospital stays (27.2 hours vs 53.1 hours; P = 0.0001). Operating room charges were higher for LA ($3839 vs $2528; P = 0.0001), with no difference in total hospital charges ($8801. vs $9147; P = 0.14). Complications between LA and OA were similar (3.6% vs 8%; P = 0.12). Converted patients were older, required more analgesia, and had higher morbidity, length of stay, and hospital charges. LA is the procedure of choice for appendicitis regardless of age, sex, BMI, or degree of appendiceal inflammation. LA is as safe and quick to perform as OA with lower analgesic requirements, length of stay, and no difference in total charges.

Laparoscopic appendectomy in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has advantages over open appendectomy (OA) in the treatment of appendicitis. It remains, however, unclear whether LA is indicated in the elderly patient population.

METHODS

Patients with primary International Classification of Diseases, revision 9, procedure codes for LA (n=32406 patients) and OA (n=112884 patients) were selected from the 1998, 1999, and 2000 Nationwide Inpatient Samples. The end points that were under investigation were the length of hospital stay, the rate of routine discharge, and in-hospital morbidity and mortality rates. Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the risk-adjusted association between the surgery type and the patient outcomes. Stratified analyses were performed according to age (65 years and older; less than 65 years old) and to the presence of appendiceal perforation or abscess.

RESULTS

After risk adjustment, patients who underwent LA had a significantly shorter mean length of stay (LA, 2.45 days; OA, 3.71 days; P <. 0001), higher rate of routine discharge (odds ratio, 2.80; P <.0001), lower overall complication rate (odds ratio, 0.92; P=.03), and mortality rate (odds ratio, 0.23; P=.001) compared with OA patients. Similar benefits of LA were found in the strata of patients who were less than 65 years old, in elderly patients, and in patients with appendiceal perforation or abscess.

CONCLUSION

LA has statistically significant advantages over OA with respect to the length of hospital stay, the rate of routine discharge, and postoperative morbidity and mortality rates for patients who are less than 65 years old, in elderly patients, and in patients with appendiceal abscess or perforation.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database

OBJECTIVE

To compare length of hospital stay, in-hospital complications, in-hospital mortality, and rate of routine discharge between laparoscopic and open appendectomy based on a representative, nationwide database.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Numerous single-institutional randomized clinical trials have assessed the efficacy of laparoscopic and open appendectomy. The results, however, are conflicting, and a consensus concerning the relative advantages of each procedure has not yet been reached.

METHODS

Patients with primary ICD-9 procedure codes for laparoscopic and open appendectomy were selected from the 1997 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a database that approximates 20% of all US community hospital discharges. Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the risk-adjusted endpoints.

RESULTS

Discharge abstracts of 43757 patients were used for our analyses. 7618 patients (17.4%) underwent laparoscopic and 36139 patients (82.6%) open appendectomy. Patients had an average age of 30.7 years and were predominantly white (58.1%) and male (58.6%). After adjusting for other covariates, laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with shorter median hospital stay (laparoscopic appendectomy: 2.06 days, open appendectomy: 2.88 days, P < 0.0001), lower rate of infections (odds ratio [OR] = 0.5 [0.38, 0.66], P < 0.0001), decreased gastrointestinal complications (OR = 0.8 [0.68, 0.96], P = 0.02), lower overall complications (OR = 0.84 [0.75, 0.94], P = 0.002), and higher rate of routine discharge (OR = 3.22 [2.47, 4.46], P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy has significant advantages over open appendectomy with respect to length of hospital stay, rate of routine discharge, and postoperative in-hospital morbidity.

Open and laparoscopic appendectomy are equally safe and acceptable in children

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively whether laparoscopic (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) are equally safe and feasible in the treatment of pediatric appendicitis.

METHODS

A total of 517 children with acute appendicitis were randomly assigned to undergo LA or OA appendectomy, based on the schedule of the attending surgeon on call. Patient age, sex, postoperative diagnosis, operating time, level of training of surgical resident, length of postoperative hospitalization, and minor and major postoperative complications were recorded. Chi-square analysis and the Student t-test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In all, 376 OA and 141 LA were performed. The two groups were comparable in terms of patient demographics and the incidence of perforated appendicitis. The operative time was also similar (47.3 +/- 19.7 vs 49.9 +/- 12.9 min). The overall incidence of minor or major complications was 11.2% in the OA group and 9.9% in the LA group.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric patients with appendicitis can safely be offered laparoscopic appendectomy without incurring a greater risk for complications. Nevertheless, a higher (but not significantly higher) abscess rate was found in patients with perforated appendicitis who underwent laparoscopy.

Comparison of patient-controlled analgesia with and without a background infusion after appendicectomy in children

BACKGROUND

There have been many studies using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and opioids for postoperative analgesia in children. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, usefulness and analgesic consumption of two different PCA programmes [bolus dose alone (BD) or bolus dose with background infusion (BD + BI)] to evaluate postoperative analgesia for children after emergency appendicectomy.

METHODS

Forty children, aged between 6 and 15 years and ASA class I or II, undergoing emergency appendicectomy were randomly allocated into two groups. The children were given a loading dose of pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 and 150 micro g.kg-1 bolus intravenously in group BD (n = 20) and pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 loading dose, 75 micro g.kg-1 bolus and 15 micro g.kg-1.h-1 background infusion in group BD + BI (n = 20). The lockout interval was 20 min in both groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in pain, sedation and nausea scores during the 24-h postoperative period between the groups (P > 0.05). Pethidine consumption was significantly lower in group BD + BI than that in group BD for the first 24-h period (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that both these PCA programmes were effective and reliable for postoperative pain relief in children. We believe that giving information about PCA to the children and their parents is useful during the preoperative period. However, the background infusion with lower bolus dose in PCA did not increase pethidine consumption.