Balancing the risk of postoperative surgical infections: a multivariate analysis of factors associated with laparoscopic appendectomy from the NSQIP database. Ann Surg. 2010;252:895-900. [PMID: 21107099 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181f194fe]

Does the Experience Level of Surgeons and Assistants Influence the Rate of Complications Following Appendicectomy?

Background Appendicectomies are the most frequently performed acute general surgery. The risk of complications depends on several factors, including patient age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), duration of symptoms, serum inflammatory markers, and the grade of inflammation. Prior research failed to demonstrate a relationship between the rate of complications and the surgeon's level of experience. It is unclear if the assistant's level of experience influences complication rates. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the relationship between the surgeon's and assistant's position and the rate of complications following appendicectomy. We also explored whether more experienced staff were involved in higher-risk cases and their relationship with resource utilization. Results There was no significant difference in total complication rates based on the surgeon's and assistant's position (p = 0.48 and p = 0.99, respectively). Post-operative bleeding was the only complication that correlated with the assistant's level of experience (p = 0.002). More experienced surgeons performed faster appendicectomies (p =0.002), while the assistant's position had no influence (p = 0.47). There was no statistically significant relationship between the surgeon's and assistant's position, and post-operative length of admission, or risk factors for complications as measured by age, days of abdominal pain, white blood cell count (WCC), C-reactive protein (CRP), ASA, radiographic and intra-operative American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST). Conclusion Experienced surgeons performed faster appendicectomies. There was a trend toward higher rates of post-operative bleeding with less experienced assistants. Otherwise, there was no relationship between the surgeon's experience level and post-appendicectomy complication rates, length of post-operative stay, or patient risk factors for complications.

Early surgery for perforated appendicitis: Are we moving the needle on postoperative abscess?

BACKGROUND

Perforated appendicitis is often managed nonoperatively though upfront surgery is becoming more common. We describe postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing surgery at their index hospitalization for perforated appendicitis.

METHODS

We used the 2016-2020 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients with appendicitis who underwent appendectomy or partial colectomy. The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI).

RESULTS

132,443 patients with appendicitis underwent immediate surgery. Of 14.1% patients with perforated appendicitis, 84.3% underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Intra-abdominal abscess rates were lowest after laparoscopic appendectomy (9.4%). Open appendectomy (OR 5.14, 95% CI 4.06-6.51) and laparoscopic partial colectomy (OR 4.60, 95% CI 2.38-8.89) were associated with higher likelihoods of SSIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront surgical management of perforated appendicitis is now predominantly approached by laparoscopy, often without bowel resection. Postoperative complications occurred less frequently with laparoscopic appendectomy compared to other approaches. Laparoscopic appendectomy during the index hospitalization is an effective approach to perforated appendicitis.

Ultrasound vs. clinical diagnosis-which is better in diagnosing acute appendicitis?: a cohort study

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of right iliac fossa pain which often warrants surgical management. In many cases, abdominal ultrasonography (USS) is done to confirm the diagnosis however negative appendicectomy is common due to atypical presentations and different visualisation rate. The unnecessary operative intervention can result in complications. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy between clinical diagnosis and USS in diagnosing acute appendicitis to avoid negative appendicectomy and prevent further complications.

Method

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a district general hospital which 1046 cases of laparoscopic appendicectomy were included and examined for the use of USS or clinical diagnosis. The sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive value in USS and data in clinical evaluation were analysed for their accuracy in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis based on the histology results post appendicectomy.

Results

Clinical diagnosis without preoperative imaging was found to have a significantly lower negative appendicectomy rate of 27.20% compared with 42.67% in those who underwent ultrasound. 44.64% of the patients were misdiagnosed with a normal USS result who had a subsequent positive histology of appendicitis.

Conclusions

USS has been shown to be less sensitive for diagnosing acute appendicitis which results in high negative appendicectomy and misdiagnosis rate. With an increasing burden of health budget and resources, cautious and appropriate use of USS would avoid the misdiagnosis and prevent further complications. Thorough clinical evaluation remains an important first step and role in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Implementing a surgical site infection prevention bundle for emergency appendectomy: Worth the effort or waste of time?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and impact of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle for emergency appendectomy.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients undergoing emergency appendectomy were prospectively included during a 10-year study period (2011-2020). The care bundle was implemented as of November 1, 2018, and focused on 4 intraoperative items (disinfection, antibiotic prophylaxis, induction temperature control >36.5°C, and intracavity lavage). The primary outcome was the compliance to bundle items. Thirty-day surgical site infections were assessed by the independent Swiss National SSI Surveillance Program (2011 to October 2018) and by an institutional audit (November 2018-2020). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were identified through multinominal logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1,901 patients, 449 (23.6%) were included after bundle implementation. Overall surgical site infection rate was 111 (5.8%). In 42 patients with surgical site infection (37.8%), antibiotic treatment alone was done, and additional surgical management was necessary in 31 patients (27.9%), computed tomography-guided drainage in 30 patients (27%), and bedside wound opening in 9 cases (8.1%). Overall compliance to the bundle was 79.9%. Overall surgical site infection rates were decreased after bundle implementation (17/449 [3.8%] vs 94/1,452 [6.5%], P = .038), mainly due to a decrease in superficial incisional infections (P = .014). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were surgical duration ≥60 minutes (odds ratio: 1.66, P = .018), contamination class IV (odds ratio: 2.64, P < .001), and open or converted approach (odds ratio: 4.0, P < .001), and the bundle was an independent protective factor (odds ratio: 0.58, P = .048).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle was feasible and might have a beneficial impact on surgical site infection rates after emergency appendectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the preferred approach in uncomplicated appendicitis. However, in patients with complicated appendicitis (CA), the best approach is still unclear though laparoscopy is being increasingly preferred over open appendicectomy (OA) nowadays.

AIM

To comprehensively review the current literature and compare the associations of LA and OA concerning various postoperative outcomes in order to determine the best approach for children with CA.

METHODS

The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to and an electronic database search was extensively performed. Data analysis, including subgroup analysis of randomized-control trials, was performed using RevMan 5.3. Methodological and statistical heterogeneity, as well as publication bias of the included studies, were assessed.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (266 LA versus 354 OA) and thirty-six case-controlled trials (2580 LA versus 3043 OA) were included in the analysis. Compared to OA, LA has a shorter length of stay, a lower rate of surgical site infection as well as a significantly lower overall complication rate. The rates of intraabdominal abscess formation, post-operative fever, pneumonia and ileus are similar in the two groups. So are the rates of readmissions and reoperations. LA was also shown to have a shorter time taken to oral intake and a lesser requirement of analgesics as well as intravenous antibiotics. Operative time for OA was found to be significantly shorter than that for LA.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis objectively demonstrates that laparoscopy has a better overall complication profile compared to OA and should be the procedure of choice in children with complicated appendicitis.

Prophylactic Drainage after Appendectomy for Perforated Appendicitis in Adults: A Post Hoc Analysis of an EAST Multi-Center Study

Background: We sought to assess the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage to prevent complications after appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of a prospective multi-center study of appendicitis in adults (≥ 18 years), we included patients with perforated appendicitis diagnosed intra-operatively. The 634 subjects were divided into groups on the basis of receipt of prophylactic drains. The demographics and outcomes analyzed were surgical site infection (SSI), intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), Clavien-Dindo complications, secondary interventions, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Multivariable logistic regression for the cumulative 30-day incidence of IAA was performed controlling for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), antibiotic duration, presence of drains, and Operative American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Grade. Results: In comparing the Drain (n = 159) versus No-Drain (n = 475) groups, there was no difference in the frequency of male gender (61% versus 55%; p = 0.168), weight (87.9 ± 27.9 versus 83.8 ± 23.4 kg; p = 0.071), Alvarado score (7 [6-8] versus 7 [6-8]; p = 0.591), white blood cell (WBC) count (14.8 ± 4.8 versus 14.9 ± 4.5; p = 0.867), or CCI (1 [0-3] versus 1 [0-2]; p = 0.113). The Drain group was significantly older (51 ± 16 versus 48 ± 17 years; p = 0.017). Drain use increased as AAST EGS Appendicitis Operative Severity Grade increased: Grade 3 (62/311; 20%), Grade 4 (46/168; 27%), and Grade 5 (51/155; 33%); p = 0.007. For index hospitalization, the Drain group had a higher complication rate (43% versus 28%; p = 0.001) and longer LOS (4 [3-7] versus 3 [1-5] days; p < 0.001). We could not detect a difference between the groups in the incidence of SSI, IAA, or secondary interventions. There was no difference in 30-day emergency department visits, re-admissions, or secondary interventions. Multi-variable logistic regression showed that only AAST Grade (odds ratio 2.7; 95% confidence interval7 1.5-4.7; p = 0.001) was predictive of the cumulative 30-day incidence of IAA. Conclusions: Prophylactic drainage after appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in adults is not associated with fewer intra-abdominal abscesses but is associated with longer hospital LOS. Increasing AAST EGS Appendicitis Operative Grade is a strong predictor of intra-abdominal abscess.

Risk-adjustment models for clean and colorectal surgery surgical site infection for the Spanish health system

OBJECTIVE

To develop risk-adjusted models for two quality indicators addressing surgical site infection (SSI) in clean and colorectal surgery, to be used for benchmarking and quality improvement in the Spanish National Health System.

STUDY DESIGN

A literature review was undertaken to identify candidate adjustment variables. The candidate variables were revised by clinical experts to confirm their clinical relevance to SSI; experts also offered additional candidate variables that were not identified in the literature review. Two risk-adjustment models were developed using multiple logistic regression thus allowing calculation of the adjusted indicator rates.

DATA SOURCE

The two SSI indicators, with their corresponding risk-adjustment models, were calculated from administrative databases obtained from nine public hospitals. A dataset was obtained from a 10-year period (2006-2015), and it included data from 21 571 clean surgery patients and 6325 colorectal surgery patients.

ANALYSIS METHODS

Risk-adjustment regression models were constructed using Spanish National Health System data. Models were analysed so as to prevent overfitting, then tested for calibration and discrimination and finally bootstrapped.

RESULTS

Ten adjustment variables were identified for clean surgery SSI, and 23 for colorectal surgery SSI. The final adjustment models showed fair calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow: clean surgery χ2 = 6.56, P = 0.58; colorectal surgery χ2 = 6.69, P = 0.57) and discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve: clean surgery 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.77; colorectal surgery 0.62, 95% CI 0.60-0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed risk-adjustment models can be used to explain patient-based differences among healthcare providers. They can be used to adjust the two proposed SSI indicators.

Acute appendicitis and the role of pre-operative imaging: A cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain is amongst the most common presentation to the surgical team. Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of this pain and often warrants surgical intervention. In many cases intervention results in a negative appendicectomy with unnecessary complications as a result. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of pre-operative imaging in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis to reduce the rate of negative appendicectomy and unnecessary operative intervention.

METHODS

A retrospective single centre cohort study was undertaken in a district general hospital (DGH) of all laparoscopic appendicectomies over a six-year period. 1344 cases were included and were examined for the use of pre-operative imaging (and type) or none. The sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive value for each type of imaging were analysed for their accuracy in diagnosis appendicitis based on the final histological analysis.

RESULTS

The negative appendicectomy rate was found to be greatest in those undergoing ultrasonography (48.21%) as their method of pre-operative imaging whilst those who underwent computed tomography (CTAP 20.26%) had a lower rate equivalent to that of clinical diagnosis alone (20.73%).

CONCLUSION

USS is less sensitive than CT in diagnosing acute appendicitis. There is no statistically significant difference in negative appendicectomy rate between clinical diagnosis and CT diagnosis. Pre-operative imaging has a role in the diagnosis of appendicitis but needs to be utilised appropriately to reduce the strain on the surgical department and prevent the potential of a negative appendicectomy.

Application of machine learning to the prediction of postoperative sepsis after appendectomy

BACKGROUND

We applied various machine learning algorithms to a large national dataset to model the risk of postoperative sepsis after appendectomy to evaluate utility of such methods and identify factors associated with postoperative sepsis in these patients.

METHODS

The National Surgery Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients undergoing appendectomy between 2005 and 2017. Logistic regression, support vector machines, random forest decision trees, and extreme gradient boosting machines were used to model the occurrence of postoperative sepsis.

RESULTS

In the study, 223,214 appendectomies were identified; 2,143 (0.96%) were indicated as having postoperative sepsis. Logistic regression (area under the curve 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.73), random forest decision trees (area under the curve 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.73), and extreme gradient boosting (area under the curve 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.73) afforded similar performance, while support vector machines (area under the curve 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.52) had worse performance. Variable importance analyses identified preoperative congestive heart failure, transfusion, and acute renal failure as predictors of postoperative sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning methods can be used to predict the development of sepsis after appendectomy with moderate accuracy. Such predictive modeling has potential to ultimately allow for preoperative recognition of patients at risk for developing postoperative sepsis after appendectomy thus facilitating early intervention and reducing morbidity.

[The use of physical factors in the postoperative period with destructive appendicitis in children: the current state of the problem]

Acute appendicitis is the most common childhood surgical disease. With the use of laparoscopic appendectomy for destructive appendicitis in children, the number of postoperative complications significantly decreased. However, in recent years there has been no tendency towards their further decline. The use of non-drug exposure, which has both local and systemic anti-inflammatory effects, can lead to further improvement in the treatment results of the most severe forms of the disease. As a result of a literature review, it was found that there is very little information about the use of physical factors in the postoperative period with destructive appendicitis in children. The effectiveness of the physical factors of systemic exposure (intravenous laser irradiation of blood, the use of ozone) was noted, but currently there are no recommendations on the application of local exposure physiotherapy techniques. Thus, the study of the effectiveness of the use of physical factors in the postoperative period with destructive appendicitis in children at the present stage remains relevant.

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy: Outcomes Analysis

The advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) over open appendectomy (OA) are unclear. This study compares the outcomes of LA versus OA. A retrospective study from 1998 to 2008 of patients (18 years or older) with appendicitis was performed from 12 medical centers. Study outcomes included 30-day postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization (LOH). Overall, 16,512 patients were included in this study (LA = 10,075, OA = 6437). Male patients (LA = 52.9% vs OA = 57.3%, P < 0.0001) and patients with perforated appendicitis (LA = 19.3% vs OA = 32.8%, P < 0.0001) were more likely to undergo OA. LA for nonperforated appendicitis was associated with a lower wound infection rate (LA = 1.9% vs OA = 3.1%, P < 0.0001) and shorter LOH (LA = 1.4 ± 1.2 vs OA = 1.7 ± 1.2 days, P < 0.0001). Similar results were seen with LA for perforated appendicitis (wound infection: LA = 5.0% vs OA = 9.1%, P < 0.0001; LOH: LA = 3.8 ± 2.7 vs OA = 5.2 ± 3.0, P < 0.0001). Postoperative abscess drainage and readmission rates were similar between LA and OA for both nonperforated and perforated appendicitis. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that LA was associated with lower wound infection (odds ratio [OR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5 to 0.7), higher abscess drainage (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.6), and shorter LOH. In conclusion, LA continues to be the preferred operation for appendicitis in adults.

Cost Saving of Short Hospitalization Nonoperative Management for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management (NOM) of uncomplicated appendicitis has gained recognition as an alternative to surgery. In the largest published randomized trial (Appendicitis Acuta), patients received a 3-d hospital stay for intravenous antibiotics; however, cost implications for health care systems remain unknown. We hypothesized short stay protocols would be cost saving compared with a long stay protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We constructed a Markov model comparing the cost of three protocols for NOM of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: (1) long stay (3-d hospitalization), (2) short stay (1-d hospitalization), and (3) emergency department (ED) discharge. The long stay protocol was modeled on data from the APPAC trial. Model variables were abstracted from national database and literature review. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the impact of uncertainty on the model.

RESULTS

The long stay treatment protocol had a total 5-y projected cost of $10,735 per patient. The short stay treatment protocol costs $8026 per patient, and the ED discharge protocol costs $6,825, which was $2709 and $3910 less than the long stay protocol, respectively. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the relative risk of treatment failure with the short stay protocol needed to exceed 6.3 (absolute risk increase of 31%) and with the ED discharge protocol needed to exceed 8.75 (absolute risk increase of 45%) in order for the long stay protocol to become cost saving.

CONCLUSIONS

Short duration hospitalization protocols to treat appendicitis nonoperatively with antibiotics are cost saving under almost all model scenarios. Future consideration of patient preferences and health-related quality of life will need to be made to determine if short stay treatment protocols are cost-effective.

Stump appendicitis occurred two and half years after first laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis with abscess: A report of a case

•

Emergent surgery for perforated appendicitis with abscess is should be carefully judged.

•

It may lead to insufficient anatomical recognition or postoperative complications.

•

The benefits of laparoscopic drainage for appendiceal abscess should be known.

•

It is very important to understand the correct management for perforated appendicitis with abscess.

Introduction

The management of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon is a clinical important issue. Immediate appendectomy in these cases may be technically demanding because of the distorted anatomy and difficult to close the appendiceal stump because of the inflammation.

Presentation of case

A 32-year-old female was referred to our hospital with abdominal pain. Enlarged appendix and abscess were recognized on CT scan. Preoperative diagnosis was perforated appendicitis with abscess and laparoscopic surgery was performed. The appendix was perforated and cut by stapler, but complete resection was impossible. Endoscopic transrectal drainage was performed for a pelvic abscess on the 10th POD and the patient’s condition improved. Thirty months after the surgery, however, the patient was again referred to our hospital for abdominal pain. CT scan revealed an enlarged remnant appendix. Preoperative diagnosis was stump appendicitis after the incomplete first appendectomy. Emergent second appendectomy and partial resection of the cecum were performed. The postoperative course was uneventful.

Discussion

In the first operation, we mistakenly thought that the base of the appendix was cut. It was not cut, however and it remained, which was lead to stump appendicitis. Furthermore, postoperative abdominal abscess was also occurred. Immediate appendectomy for perforated appendicitis with abscess is associated with a higher morbidity. Nonsurgical treatment with drainage and/or antibiotics should be selected. Laparoscopic drainage is the useful options when CT-guided drainage is impossible.

Conclusion

It is crucial to understand the correct management of perforated appendicitis with abscess to avoid serious complications.

Comprehensive review of typical and atypical pathology of the appendix on CT: cases with clinical implications

Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency in the United States with approximately 250,000 cases annually. Computed Tomography (CT) has emerged as the most accurate diagnostic test to triage these patients for emergent surgery. Although the radiology search pattern is prioritized to detect an inflamed appendix, not all appearances equate to a typical surgical appendicitis. There are a select set of atypical pathologies involving the appendix that have subtle differences on CT, but can have catastrophic complications if treated with emergent appendectomy. This paper will review the spectrum of CT appearances and clinical management for typical and atypical appendiceal pathologies.

Population-level outcomes of early versus delayed appendectomy for acute appendicitis using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of appendectomy for acute appendicitis has been analyzed with mixed results. We hypothesized that delayed appendectomy would be associated with increased 30-d morbidity and mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all patients undergoing nonelective appendectomy from 2012 to 2015 with a postoperative diagnosis of appendicitis. Patients were grouped based on hospital day (HD) of operation. Primary outcomes included 30-d mortality and major complications. Logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of major morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2015, 112,122 patients underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Appendectomies performed on HD 3 had significantly worse outcomes as demonstrated by increased 30-d mortality (0.6%) and all major postoperative complications (8%) in comparison with operations taking place on HD 1 (0.1%; 3.4%) or HD 2 (0.1%, P < 0.001; 3.6%, P < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, open operations had significantly higher mortality and major postoperative complications, including organ/space surgical site infections (4.6% open versus 2.1% laparoscopic; P < 0.001). Patients with decreased baseline physical status by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status class had the worst outcomes (1.5% mortality; 14% major complications) when operation was delayed to HD 3. Logistic regression revealed higher American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status class and open operations as predictors of major complications; however, HD was not (P = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program demonstrate similar outcomes of appendectomy for acute appendicitis when the operation is performed on HD 1 or 2; however, outcomes are significantly worse for appendectomies delayed until HD 3. Increased complications in this group are likely not attributable to HD of operation, but rather decreased baseline health status and procedure type.

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

AIM

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

BACKGRAOUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy

Acute appendicitis (AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Non-operative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient's factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon's skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner (i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.

TULAA: A Minimally Invasive Appendicectomy Technique for the Paediatric Patient

TULAA or Transumbilical Laparoscopic Assisted Appendicectomy is a minimally invasive technique described by Pelosi in 1992 for the removal of the inflamed appendix. Its main advantage is the possibility of exploring the peritoneal cavity and performing a simple and safe extracorporeal appendicectomy. Since its first description, different authors reported their experience with such technique. The aim of this review is to summarise the surgical outcomes currently reported in the literature for this minimally invasive surgical approach and compare it with standard open and laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis.

Retrospective Multicenter Study on Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infections after Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) are seen in up to 5% of patients after appendectomy for acute appendicitis. SSI are associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased costs. The aim of this multicenter study was to identify factors associated with SSI after appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between June 2014 and January 2015 in 6 teaching hospitals in the southwest of the Netherlands were included. Patient, diagnostic, intra-operative and disease-related factors were collected from the patients' charts. Primary outcome was surgical site infection. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors for SSI.

RESULTS

Some 637 patients were included. Forty-two patients developed a SSI. In univariable analysis body temperature >38°C, CRP>65 and complex appendicitis were associated with SSI. After multivariable logistic regression with stepwise backwards elimination, complex appendicitis was significantly associated with SSI (OR 4.09; 95% CI 2.04-8.20). Appendiceal stump closure with a stapler device was inversely correlated with SSI (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.97) Conclusions: Complex appendicitis is a risk factor for SSI and warrants close monitoring postoperatively. The use of a stapler device for appendiceal stump closure is associated with a reduced risk of SSI.

Cost effectiveness of nonoperative management versus laparoscopic appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy remains the gold standard in the treatment of acute, uncomplicated appendicitis in the United States. Nonetheless, there is growing evidence that nonoperative management is safe and efficacious.

METHODS

We constructed a decision tree to compare nonoperative management of appendicitis with laparoscopic appendectomy in otherwise healthy adults. Model variables were abstracted from a literature review, data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data, the Medicare Physician Fee schedule, and the American College of Surgeons Surgical Risk Calculator. Uncertainty surrounding parameters of the model was assessed via 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Operative management cost $12,213 per patient. Nonoperative management without interval appendectomy (IA) was the dominant strategy, costing $1,865 less and producing 0.03 more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Nonoperative management with IA cost $4,271 more than operative management, but yielded only 0.01 additional QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested operative management would become the preferred strategy if the recurrence rate was >40.5% or the total cost of appendectomy was decreased to <$5,468. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed nonoperative management without IA was the preferred strategy in 95.6% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Nonoperative management without IA is the least costly, most effective treatment for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis and warrants further evaluation in a disease thought to be definitively surgical.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) : a multicenter retrospective study in China

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) is a new procedure for the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. The aim of the study was to review the clinical outcomes of ERAT and further examine its effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

The study was performed on patients who underwent ERAT for acute uncomplicated appendicitis at three tertiary hospitals in China from December 2009 to May 2013. Patient demographics, technique aspects of the ERAT procedures, clinical success (resolution of symptoms and normalization of laboratory tests), time until resumption of diet, and hospital stay were analyzed, and complications and recurrence were followed up.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were entered, among which 34 patients were definitely diagnosed as having acute uncomplicated appendicitis; in 7 patients, acute appendicitis was excluded by endoscopic retrograde appendicography. Thirty-three patients completed ERAT except one patient who failed appendiceal cannulation. Abdominal pain resolved immediately in 32 patients, and clinical success rate was 97 %. There was one failure case (3 %) that complicated perforation after 48 h received emergency appendectomy. The median follow-up period was 12 months (IQR = 9-23 months). During follow-up, there were no long-term complication; 2 patients (6.2 %) had recurrent abdominal pain and received appendectomy (one had a histologically normal appendix).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAT is an effective method to diagnose and treat acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Multicenter prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm its utility and place in the management of suspected acute appendicitis.

Duration of antibiotic treatment after appendicectomy for acute complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic treatment after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis aims to reduce postoperative infections. However, available data on the duration of treatment are limited. This study compared the difference in infectious complications between two protocols, involving either 3 or 5 days of postoperative antibiotic treatment.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of all adult patients who had an appendicectomy between January 2004 and December 2010 at either one of two hospitals in the same region. At location A, the protocol included 3 days of postoperative antibiotic treatment, whereas at location B it specified 5 days. The primary outcome was the development of postoperative infections as either superficial wound infection or deep intra-abdominal infections.

RESULTS

A total of 1143 patients with acute appendicitis underwent appendicectomy, of whom 267 (23.4 per cent) had complicated appendicitis. The duration of postoperative antibiotic treatment was 3 days in 135 patients (50.6 per cent) and at least 5 days in 123 (46.1 per cent). No difference was found between antibiotic treatment for 3 or 5 days in terms of developing an intra-abdominal abscess (odds ratio (OR) 1.77, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.68 to 4.58; P = 0.242) or a wound infection (OR 2.74, 0.54 to 13.80; P = 0.223). In patients with complicated appendicitis, the laparoscopic approach was identified as a risk factor for developing an intra-abdominal abscess in univariable analysis (OR 2.46, 1.00 to 6.04; P = 0.049), but was not confirmed as an independent risk factor for this complication in multivariable analysis (OR 2.32, 0.75 to 7.14; P = 0.144).

CONCLUSION

After appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis, 3 days of antibiotic treatment is equally effective as 5 days in reducing postoperative infections.

Anastomotic leak or organ space surgical site infection: What are we missing in our quality improvement programs?

BACKGROUND

Expert panels of colorectal surgeons consistently rank anastomotic leak as among the most important quality metrics for colectomies. Nonetheless, most administrative and clinical databases do not collect data on anastomotic leaks and rely on reported organ space surgical site infections (OSI) as a proxy for identifying anastomotic leaks. This study questions the validity of using OSI as a surrogate for anastomotic leak.

METHODS

The Upstate New York Surgical Quality Initiative (UNYSQI) is a collaboration of 12 hospitals that prospectively collects colectomy-specific metrics, including anastomotic leak, in addition to standard National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data, including OSIs. Cases with an organ space infection and/or anastomotic leak were selected from the 2010-2011 UNYSQI database. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared for cases with organ space infections and anastomotic leaks.

RESULTS

Overall, 3% of colectomies had a reported organ space infection and 4% had an anastomotic leak. Among cases having anastomotic leaks, only 25% were also coded as having an organ space infection, leaving 75% of anastomotic leaks not captured by the NSQIP database (κ = 0.272; P ≤ .001).

CONCLUSION

Organ space infection is a poor surrogate for anastomotic leak, resulting in grossly underestimated leak rates and seemingly represents different postoperative courses. Procedure-specific quality measures for colorectal surgery should include data collection on anastomotic leaks to provide accurate data for use in improving patient care.

Retained faecolith: an avoidable complication of laparoscopic appendicectomy

A 26-year-old woman presented to the accident and emergency department 9 days post laparoscopic appendicectomy for a non-perforated, but gangrenous appendicitis. She was found to have a retained faecolith with a pelvic abscess. This case demonstrates one of the common pitfalls of the laparoscopic appendicectomy and we discuss some technical points to avoid such complications.

Risk Factors for Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Surgery: Analysis of 2138 Converted Operations in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Minimal access procedures have influenced surgical practice and patient expectations. Risk of laparoscopic conversion to open surgery is frequently cited but vaguely quantified. The present study examines three common procedures to identify risk factors for laparoscopic conversion to open (LCO) events. Cross-sectional analysis using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP; 2005 to 2009) identified cases with laparoscopic procedure codes for appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and bariatric procedures. The primary outcome was conversion of a laparoscopic procedure to its open equivalent. Summary statistics for laparoscopic and LCO groups were compared and logistic regression analysis was used to estimate patient and operative risk factors for conversion. Of 176,014 selected laparoscopic operations, 2,138 (1.2%) were converted. Most patients were female (68%) and white (71.2%); mean age was 45.1 years. LCO cholecystectomy was significantly more likely (n = 1526 [1.9%]) and LCO bariatric procedures were less likely (n = 121 [0.3%]); appendectomy was intermediate (n = 491 [1.0%], P < 0.001). Patient factors associated with LCO included male sex ( P < 0.001), age 30 years or older ( P < 0.025), American Society of Anesthesiologists Class 2 to 4 ( P < 0.001), obesity ( P < 0.01), history of bleeding disorder ( P = 0.036), or preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis ( P < 0.001). LCO was associated with greater incidence of postoperative complications, including death, organ space surgical site infection, sepsis, wound dehiscence, and return to the operating room ( P < 0.001). Overall LCO incidence is low in hospitals participating in ACS-NSQIP. Conversion risk factors include patient age, sex, obesity, and preoperative comorbidity as well as the procedure performed. This information should be valuable to clinicians in discussing conversion risk with patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy compared with laparoscopic and laparotomic approaches in acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal surgery. Despite nearly three decades comparing laparoscopic with laparotomic appendectomy, the available scientific evidence does not show consensus of opinion about the best access for the treatment of acute appendicitis. The transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy combines the advantages of laparoscopic access to the simplicity of the laparotomic technique.

AIM

To compare the three technical advantages showing possible tendency to transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study comparing three series with 1232 patients. Variables were: operative time, hospital stay, early and late postoperative complications, postoperative pain and earlier return to daily activities.

RESULTS

The averaged surgical time was 59.8 min in laparotomic appendectomy, 75.5 min in laparoscopic appendectomy and 51,7 min in transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy with significant difference. The incidence of postoperative pain, general complications and wound infection were greater in the group submitted to laparotomic appendectomy. The earlier return to daily activities and short hospital stay were observed in groups laparoscopic appendectomy and transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness and safety of transumbilical laparoscopic assisted appendectomy can make this technique the preferred choice in the initial management of patients with acute appendicitis.

Outcomes associated with resident involvement in partial colectomy

BACKGROUND

Surgical cases that include trainees are associated with worse outcomes in comparison with those that include attending surgeons alone.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify whether resident involvement in partial colectomy was associated with worse outcomes when evaluated by surgical approach and resident experience.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

SETTINGS

This study evaluates cases included in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

PATIENTS

All patients were included who underwent partial colectomy including both open and laparoscopic approaches.

INTERVENTIONS

Residents were involved.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were the association of resident involvement and major complication events, minor complication events, unplanned return to operating room, and operative time.

RESULTS

Cases with residents were associated with major complications (OR 1.18, CI 1.09-1.27, p < 0.001) on multivariate analysis. However, after including operative time in the model only open cases involving fifth year residents were still associated with major complications (OR 1.13, p = 0.037). Resident involvement was associated with increased likelihood of minor complications (OR 1.3, p < 0.001) and an increased risk of unplanned return to the operating room (OR 1.20, p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for cases with residents on average by 33.7 minutes and 27 minutes for open and laparoscopic cases.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design and lack of data on teachings status, case complexity, and intraoperative evaluation of technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Resident involvement in partial colectomies is associated with an increased major complications, minor complications, likelihood of return to the operating room, and operative time.

Appendicitis: changing perspectives

Neoplasms are an uncommon finding after appendectomy, with malignant tumors occurring in less than 1% of the surgical specimens, and carcinoid being the most frequent malignancy. A negative or inconclusive ultrasound is not adequate to rule out appendicitis and should be followed by CT scan. For pregnant patients, MRI is a reasonable alternative to CT scan. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics is safe as an initial treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis, with a significant decrease in complications but a high failure rate. Open and laparoscopic appendectomies for appendicitis provide similar results overall, although the laparoscopic technique may be advantageous for obese and elderly patients but may be associated with a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess. Preoperative diagnostic accuracy is of utmost importance during pregnancy because a negative appendectomy is associated with a significant incidence of fetal loss. The increased morbidity associated with appendectomy delay suggests that prompt surgical intervention remains the safest approach. Routine incidental appendectomy should not be performed except in selected cases. Interval appendectomy is not indicated because of considerable risks of complications and lack of any clinical benefit. Patients older than 40 years with an appendiceal mass or abscess treated nonoperatively should routinely have a colonoscopy as part of their follow-up to rule out cancer or alternative diagnosis.

Tailoring the operative approach for appendicitis to the patient: a prediction model from national surgical quality improvement program data

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is increasingly being performed in the United States, despite controversy about differences in infectious complication rates compared with open appendectomy (OA). Subpopulations exist in which infectious complication rates, both surgical site and organ space, differ with respect to LA compared with OA.

STUDY DESIGN

All appendectomies in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were analyzed with respect to surgical site infection (SSI) and organ space infection (OSI). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified independent predictors of SSI or OSI. Probabilities of SSI or OSI were determined for subpopulations to identify when LA was superior to OA.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2009, there were 61,830 appendectomies performed (77.5% LA), of which 9,998 (16.2%) were complicated (58.7% LA). The risk of SSI was considerably lower for LA in both noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Across all ages, body mass index, renal function, and WBCs, LA was associated with a lower probability of SSI. The risk of OSI was considerably greater for LA in both noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. In complicated appendicitis, OA was associated with a lower probability of OSI in patients with WBC >12 cells × 10(3)/μL. In noncomplicated appendicitis, OA was associated with a lower probability of OSI in patients with a body mass index <37.5 when compared with LA.

CONCLUSIONS

Subpopulations exist in which OA is superior to LA in terms of OSI, however, SSI is consistently lower in LA patients.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis in children

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is one of the most common emergency operations performed in the pediatric population. The aim of this pooled analysis is to compare the outcome from complicated appendicitis (CA) and uncomplicated appendicitis (UA) following laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) in children.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Primary outcome measures were incidence of complications, intra-abdominal abscess, and wound infection. Secondary outcomes were length of operation, length of hospital stay, incidence of bowel obstruction, and readmission.

RESULTS

Seventy-three thousand one hundred fifty appendectomies for UA and 34,474 appendectomies for CA were included. For UA, the only significant difference between the groups was a reduced length of hospital stay following LA. LA in CA was associated with reduced complications (pooled odds ratio [POR] = 0.53; P < 0.05), wound infections (POR = 0.42; P < 0.05), length of hospital stay (WMD = -0.67; P < 0.05), and bowel obstruction episodes (POR = 0.8; P < 0.05), but an increased incidence of intra-abdominal abscess and length of operation.

CONCLUSION

Pooled analysis demonstrates that, in children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, LA is associated with a reduced hospital stay but broad equivalence in postoperative morbidity when compared with the conventional approach. Although overall morbidity is reduced when the laparoscopic approach is utilized, in cases of CA, the risk of intra-abdominal abscess is increased.

Risk factors for mesh-related infections after hernia repair surgery: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

Mesh infection, although infrequent, is a devastating complication of mesh hernioplasties. The aim of this study was to systematically review and synthesize the available evidence on risk factors for synthetic mesh infection after hernioplasty. A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Scopus databases. The extracted data were synthesized with the methodology of meta-analysis. We identified six eligible studies that reported on 2,418 mesh hernioplasties. The crude mesh infection rate was 5%. Statistically significant risk factors were smoking (risk ratio [RR] = 1.36 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07, 1.73]; 1,171 hernioplasties), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 (RR = 1.40 [1.15, 1.70]; 1,682 hernioplasties), and emergency operation (RR = 2.46 [1.56, 3.91]; 1,561 hernioplasties). Also, mesh infections were significantly correlated with patient age (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 2.63 [0.22, 5.04]; 2,364 hernioplasties), ASA score (WMD = 0.23 [0.08, 0.38]; 1,682 hernioplasties), and the duration of the hernioplasty (WMD = 44.92 [25.66, 64.18]; 833 hernioplasties). A trend toward higher mesh infection rates was observed in obese patients (RR = 1.41 [0.94, 2.11]; 2,243 hernioplasties) and in patients operated on by a resident (in contrast to a consultant; RR = 1.18 [0.99, 1.40]; 982 hernioplasties). Mesh infections usually resulted in mesh removal, and common pathogens included Staphylococcus spp., Enterococcus spp., and gram-negative bacteria. Patient age, ASA score, smoking, and the duration and emergency setting of the operation were found to be associated with the development of synthetic mesh infection. The heterogeneity of the available evidence should be taken under consideration. Prospective studies with a meticulous follow-up are warranted to further investigate mesh-related infections.

Short- and long-term results of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Clinical advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy have been shown in numerous trials and reviews. Most of these advantages are small and of limited clinical relevance, while laparoscopic operation costs are reported to be higher. The present study compares short- and long-term results of conventional appendectomy with or without diagnostic laparoscopy (OA), and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent appendectomy in our institution from 1995 to 2005 were included retrospectively. Patient data were retrieved from medical records, questionnaires sent by mail, and records of general practitioners. Primary outcome parameters were long-term complications, readmissions, and reinterventions (>30 days postoperatively). Secondary outcome parameters were short-term complications, readmissions, and reinterventions (≤30 days postoperatively).

RESULTS

A total of 755 patients were included, 545 of whom underwent OA, with the remaining 210 undergoing LA. In the long term there were few complications noted, and there were no significant differences in complications between the two groups. Within 30 days postoperatively, LA was associated with a significantly higher incidence of abdominal abscesses with consequent diagnostic investigations, interventions, and readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although laparoscopic appendectomy is known to deliver clinical advantages, it is associated with a higher incidence of abdominal abscesses. Because the procedure is about to become the standard of care, future research must be directed at solving this issue. The expected lower incidence of incisional hernia and small bowel obstruction after laparoscopic appendectomy was not shown in the present study.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and efficacious for the elderly: an analysis using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing use of laparoscopic appendectomy, data demonstrating outcomes of this technique exclusively among the elderly population are scarce. This study aimed to compare 30-day postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay among elderly patients after appendectomy.

METHODS

Appendicitis patients older than 65 years were extracted from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) database. Demographics and rates of complications for patients undergoing open and laparoscopic appendectomies were compared. Uni- and multivariate analyses adjusted for differences between groups compared the end points of major and minor complications as well as the days of hospital stay after initial surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 3,335 patients underwent appendectomy, with 2,235 patients (67%) receiving a laparoscopic procedure. The open appendectomy patients were significantly older and more likely to have various preoperative comorbidities (p<0.05). No difference in median operative time between the two techniques was found. Both required 51 min (p=0.11). The open cases had higher rates of both major and minor postoperative complications than the laparoscopic cases (p<0.0001), both overall and before discharge. Multivariate analysis showed no association between operative approach and major complications, and a reduced risk of minor complications with laparoscopy. Length of surgical stay was longer for the open group than for the laparoscopically treated group (median, 4 days vs 2 days; p<0.05). After adjustment, laparoscopy still was significantly associated with a shorter hospital stay than open appendectomy (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe procedure for elderly patients. During the 30-day postoperative period, no correlation with major complications was found, and the findings showed a beneficial association with regard to minor complications. After adjustment for perioperative factors, laparoscopy is associated with a shorter hospital stay than open appendectomy.