Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized controlled study

Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Three-port (trocar) laparoscopic appendectomy is the standard treatment for acute appendicitis and previous studies have compared to single-incision approach, however, they often include both pediatric and adult patients and fail to account for surgeons' experience, leading to variability in outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to address these literature gaps by focusing on adult patients and controlling for surgeon expertise. We conducted a comprehensive search of randomized controlled trials comparing single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) up to November 2024. We assessed the length of hospitalization, operative duration, postoperative complications, and surgical wound infections. Data were synthesized using random-effects models to account for variability among studies. The meta-analysis included four studies with a total of 408 patients, comprising 202 in the single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) group and 206 in the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) group. For the length of hospitalization, no statistically significant difference was observed, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.07 days (95% CI  - 0.32 to 0.47, I2 = 0%, p = 0.72). Similarly, the operative duration showed no significant difference, with a WMD of 4.49 min (95% CI  - 7.02 to 16.00, I2 = 89%, p = 0.44). The analysis of postoperative complications also revealed no significant difference between the groups, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.32 (95% CI 0.69 to 2.51, I2 = 0%, p = 0.40). Surgical wound infections were found to be comparable, with an OR of 1.14 (95% CI 0.46 to 2.83, I2 = 0%, p = 0.78). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the results were statistically significant regarding operative duration when Kim et al. was excluded from the analysis. SILA and CLA yield comparable outcomes in terms of hospitalization length, operative duration, and complications, suggesting that both techniques are viable options for the management of acute appendicitis in adults. Further studies investigating overall cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and postoperative pain are warranted to optimize surgical approaches.PROSPERO registration: CRD42024612596.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using new surgical procedure versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy

The aim of this study was to compare the clinic outcomes between new single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (NSLA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA) for patients with acute appendicitis. Patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis and underwent appendectomy were retrospectively collected from a single clinical center from September 2021 to June 2023. Baseline characteristics, surgical information, and postoperative information were compared between the NSLA group and the CTLA group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to find out the predictors of overall complications. A total of 296 patients were enrolled from a single clinical medical center. There were 146 (49.3%) males and 150 (50.7%) females. There were 54 (18.2%) patients in the NSLA group and 242 (81.8%) patients in the CTLA group. After data analysis, we found the patients in the NSLA group had a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) than the CTLA group. The other outcomes including intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.167), operation time (P = 0.282), nature of the appendix (P = 0.971), and overall complications (P = 0.543) were not statistically different. After univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found that age (P = 0.018, OR = 1.039, 95% CI = 1.007-1.072), neutrophil percentage (P = 0.018, OR = 1.070, 95% CI = 1.011-1.132), and fever (P = 0.019, OR = 6.112, 95% CI = 1.340-27.886) were the predictors of overall complications. However, the surgical procedure (NSLA versus CTLA) was not a predictor of overall complications (P = 0.376, OR = 1.964, 95% CI = 0.440-8.768). Compared with CTLA, there was no significant increase in postoperative overall complications with NSLA, making it a safe and feasible new surgical procedure. More studies are needed to evaluate the long-term results.

Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Conventional three-access laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) is currently the gold standard treatment, however, Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) has been proposed as an alternative. The aim of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate safety and efficacy of SILA compared with conventional approach.

METHODS

Per PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CLA vs SILA for acute appendicitis. The randomised Mantel-Haenszel method was used for the meta-analysis. Statistical data analysis was performed with the Review Manager software and the risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane "Risk of Bias" assessment tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (RCTs) were selected (2646 patients). The operative time was significantly longer in the SILA group (MD = 7,32), confirmed in both paediatric (MD = 9,80), (Q = 1,47) and adult subgroups (MD = 5,92), (Q = 55,85). Overall postoperative morbidity was higher in patients who underwent SILA, but the result was not statistically significant. In SILA group were assessed shorter hospital stays, fewer wound infections and higher conversion rate, but the results were not statistically significant. Meta-analysis was not performed about cosmetics of skin scars and postoperative pain because different scales were used in each study.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis show that SILA, although associated with fewer postoperative wound infection, has a significantly longer operative time. Furthermore, the risk of postoperative general complications is still present. Further studies will be required to analyse outcomes related to postoperative pain and the cosmetics of the surgical scar.

Perioperative pain management for appendicectomy: A systematic review and Procedure-specific Postoperative Pain Management recommendations

BACKGROUND

Despite being a commonly performed surgical procedure, pain management for appendicectomy is often neglected because of insufficient evidence on the most effective treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations by assessing the available literature for optimal pain management after appendicectomy.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

This systematic review-based guideline was conducted according to the PROSPECT methodology. Relevant randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the English language from January 1999 to October 2022 were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Databases using PRISMA search protocols.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies on adults and children. If articles reported combined data from different surgeries, they had to include specific information about appendicectomies. Studies needed to measure pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS). Studies that did not report the precise appendicectomy technique were excluded.

RESULTS

Out of 1388 studies, 94 met the inclusion criteria. Based on evidence and consensus, the PROSPECT members agreed that basic analgesics [paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)] should be administered perioperatively for open and laparoscopic appendicectomies. A laparoscopic approach is preferred because of lower pain scores. Additional recommendations for laparoscopic appendicectomies include a three-port laparoscopic approach and the instillation of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic. For open appendicectomy, a preoperative unilateral transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block is recommended. If not possible, preincisional infiltration with local anaesthetics is an alternative. Opioids should only be used as rescue analgesia. Limited evidence exists for TAP block in laparoscopic appendicectomy, analgesic adjuvants for TAP block, continuous wound infiltration after open appendicectomy and preoperative ketamine and dexamethasone. Recommendations apply to children and adults.

CONCLUSION

This review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for open and laparoscopic appendicectomy. Further randomised controlled trials should evaluate the use of regional analgesia and wound infiltrations with adequate baseline analgesia, especially during the recommended conventional three-port approach.

REGISTRATION

The protocol for this study was registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration No. CRD42023387994).

Short-term outcomes of reduced versus conventional ports in sleeve gastrectomy: A controlled clinical trial

Aim

The study aims to compare the short-term outcomes of reduced ports sleeve gastrectomy versus conventional five ports sleeve gastrectomy in postoperative weight loss, morbidity rate, pain, and resolution of obesity-related diseases.

Materials and Methods

One hundred forty patients were equally allocated to reduced ports (n = 70) and conventional ports (5 ports) Laparoscopic Gastrectomy groups. The primary outcomes are postoperative pain by numeric rating score, cosmetic visual analog score, satisfaction visual analog score, operative time, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes are postoperative complications and comorbidity resolution.

Results

The numeric rating score for pain assessment was statistically significantly lower in the reduced ports group compared with the conventional ports group at 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours, postoperatively (P < .001). Cosmetic visual analog score was statistically significantly higher in the reduced ports group compared with conventional ports group at 2 and 3 months follow-up (P < .001 and P = .008, respectively). Patient satisfaction visual analog score was statistically significantly higher in the reduced ports group than the conventional ports group at 2 and 3 months follow-up (P < .001 and P = .032, respectively).

Conclusion

Reduced ports laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is safe and feasible in patients with body mass index (BMI) up to 50 kg/m2. It is cosmetically well appreciated with noticeable patient satisfaction. It should be practiced with regularity. Further trials should be considered in patients with high BMI (>50 kg/m2).

Postoperative pain and quality of life after single-incision distal gastrectomy versus multiport laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer - a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although it has been more than ten years since its first introduction, single-incision distal gastrectomy (SIDG) still lacks solid evidence and there are also no reports on patient quality of life (QOL). This study evaluates the postoperative outcomes and patient QOL of SIDG compared to multiport laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (MLDG).

METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective phase II randomized controlled study. Patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer in the distal 2/3rd of the stomach were randomized to either multiport or single-port group. Primary endpoint was pain using the visual analogue scale on postoperative day (POD) 1. Other outcomes include operative data, complications, and patient QOL using the EORTC C30 and STO22 modules.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients in the SIDG group and 40 patients in the MLDG group were enrolled from September 2017 to February 2020. Mean operation time was 154.3 ± 53.3 min in the MLDG group and 148.9 ± 50.1 min in the SIDG group (p = 0.631). There was no difference in POD1 pain scores between the two groups (MLDG = 4.0 ± 1.3, SIDG = 4.3 ± 1.3, p = 0.372). Mean hospital stay was 5.5 (range 4-12) days in the MLDG group and 5 (range 4-17) days in the SIDG group (p = 0.993). There was no statistical significance in postoperative QOL scores.

CONCLUSION

Unlike previous reports, there was no difference in POD1 pain scores between SIDG and MLDG. Nevertheless, SIDG did not increase short-term morbidity compared to MLDG and had similar outcomes in QOL.

Single-incision compared with conventional laparoscopy for appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis of the relevant literature evaluated the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) relative to those of conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS

The major biomedical databases, including ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched up to January 2022 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). SILA and CLA were compared regarding patient body mass index, operative time, and perioperative complications. The Cochrane Handbook and RevMan 5.3 were used to judge trial quality and perform the meta-analysis, respectively.

RESULTS

The 17 included RCTs comprised 2068 patients, of whom 1039 and 1029 patients underwent SILA and CLA, respectively. The operative time for SILA was longer than that for CLA (MD = 8.35 min, 95% CI = 6.58 to 10.11, P < 0.00001), but the cosmetic results from SILA were superior (SMD = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.58 to 1.03, P < 0.00001). However, the incidence rates were similar in terms of patient body mass index; postoperative pain scores; and rates of abdominal abscess, conversion to open surgery, ileus, surgical site infection, and overall perioperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

SILA is a safe technique for acute appendicitis, and its cosmetic outcomes are superior to those of CLA.

Surgical Site Infection Following Single-Port Appendectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the most common postoperative complications after appendectomy leading to recurrent surgery, prolonged hospital stay, and the use of antibiotics. Numerous studies and meta-analyses have been published on the effect of open versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) reporting faster postoperative recovery and less postoperative pain for CLA. A development from CLA has been the single-port appendectomy (SPA), associated with a better cosmesis but seemingly having a higher risk of wound infections. The aim of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis is to investigate whether reduced port or SPA alters the ratio of SSIs.

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were screened for suitable articles. All articles published between January 1, 2002, and March 23, 2022, were included. Articles regarding children below the age of 18 were excluded as well as manuscripts that investigated solemnly open appendectomies. Articles were screened for inclusion criteria by two independent authors. Incidence of SSI was the primary outcome. Duration of operation and length of hospital stay were defined as secondary outcomes.

Results

A total of 25 studies were found through a database search describing 5484 patients. A total of 2749 patients received SPA and 2735 received CLA. There was no statistical difference in the rate of SSI (P = 0.98). A total of 22 studies including 4699 patients reported the duration of operation (2223 SPA and 2476 CLA). There was a significantly shorter operation time seen in CLA. The length of hospital stay was reported in 23 studies (4735 patients: 2235 SPA and 2500 CLA). A shorter hospital stay was seen in the SPA group (P &lt; 0.00001). Separately performed analysis of randomized controlled trials could not confirm this effect (P = 0.29).

Discussion

SPA is an equally safe procedure considering SSI compared to CLA and does not lead to an increased risk of SSI. A longer operation time for SPA and a minor difference in the length of stay does lead to the use of SPA in selected patients only.

Safety and effectiveness of reduced-port laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in Asian morbidly obese patients

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the most frequently performed surgical intervention in patients with morbid obesity. Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) and reduced-port sleeve gastrectomy (RPSG) are increasingly reported in the literature. This study compared the short-term outcomes of SPSG, RPSG, and conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG). This is a single-center retrospective study of 238 morbidly obese patients, of whom 148 (62.2%) patients completed follow-up one year after surgery. Propensity score matching was performed on factors influencing the choice of approach, and fifty patients from the SPSG + RPSG and CLSG groups were successfully matched. The groups were comparable in postoperative weight loss, morbidity, pain, and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities. The percentage of excess weight loss after one year was 90.0% in the SPSG + RPSG group and 75.2% in the CLSG group (P < 0.001). Complication rates showed no significant difference. The CLSG group was superior in dyslipidemia remission (17 [37.0%] vs. 28 [63.6%], P = 0.018) in the total cohort; however, this difference disappeared after matching. Our results suggest that single-port and reduced-port approaches could be alternative choices for selected patients. As our study was limited by its retrospective nature and potential selection bias, further studies are necessary to set standardized guidelines for SPSG.

Evidence-based surgery for laparoscopic appendectomy: A stepwise systematic review

Introduction

Appendectomy is a common emergency surgery performed globally. Despite the frequency of laparoscopic appendectomy, consensus does not exist on the best way to perform each procedural step. We identified literature on key intraoperative steps to inform best technical practice during laparoscopic appendectomy.

Methods

Research questions were framed using the population, indication, comparison, outcome (PICO) format for 6 key operative steps of laparoscopic appendectomy: abdominal entry, placement of laparoscopic ports, division of mesoappendix, division of appendix, removal of appendix, and fascial closure. These questions were used to build literature queries in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. Evidence quality and certainty was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) definitions.

Results

Recommendations were rendered for 6 PICO questions based on 28 full length articles. Low quality evidence favors direct trocar insertion for abdominal entry and establishment of pneumoperitoneum. Single port appendectomy results in improved cosmesis with unclear clinical implications. There was insufficient data to determine the optimal method of appendiceal stump closure, but use of a specimen extraction bag reduces rates of superficial surgical site infection and intra-abdominal abscess. Port sites made with radially dilating trocars are less likely to necessitate closure and are less likely to result in port site hernia. When port sites are closed, a closure device should be used.

Conclusion

Key operative steps of laparoscopic appendectomy have sufficient data to encourage standardized practice.

Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial (SCAR trial)

Introduction:

Although single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) was introduced decades ago, it is still considered a difficult technique to perform compared to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). In addition, controversy about the benefits of SILA compared to CLA abound and no definite criteria for choosing SILA over CLA in patients with appendicitis currently exist. Therefore, we have planned a multi-center randomized controlled trial to compare SILA with CLA in terms of cosmetic satisfaction and pain reduction.

Methods and analysis:

Patients diagnosed with appendicitis at the participating centers will be recruited and allocated into either a CLA or an SILA groups using a 1:1 randomization. Patients in the CLA group will receive a conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy and patients in the SILA group will receive a laparoscopic appendectomy using a single-incision at the umbilicus. The primary trial endpoint is cosmetic satisfaction assessed using the Patients and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) administered 6 weeks post-surgery. Secondary trial endpoints include cosmetic satisfaction assessed via the Body Image Questionnaire, pain levels assessed via the Visual Analog Scale and International Pain Outcomes questionnaire, and the presence of postoperative complications. The target sample size of this superiority trial is 120 patients, as this will provide 80% power at the 2.5% level of significance to detect a 3-point difference in POSAS.

Discussion:

The results of this planned multi-center randomized controlled trial will provide substantive evidence to help surgeons choose when to use SILA over CLA in patients with appendicitis.

Ethics and dissemination:

This trial was approved by the institutional review board at Daegu joint on February 27, 2020 (No: 19-12-001-001) and registered with the clinical research information service (CRIS) (KCT0005048). The results of the study will be published and presented at appropriate conferences.

Highlights

Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port approach for acute appendicitis: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials

AIMS

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare outcomes of single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (SPLA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (CLA) in the management of acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with subsequent meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of outcomes were conducted. Post-operative pain at 12-h, cosmesis, need for an additional port(s), operative time, port-site hernia, ileus, surgical site infection (SSI), intra-abdominal collection, length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission, and reoperation were the evaluated outcome parameters.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs with total number of 2017 patients who underwent SPLA (n = 1009) or CLA (n = 1008) were included. SPLA was associated with a significantly higher cosmetic score (MD 1.11, P= 0.03) but significantly longer operative time (MD 7.08, P = 0.00001) compared to CLA. However, the difference was not significant between SPLA and CLA in the post-operative pain score at 12-h (MD -0.13, P = 0.69), need for additional port(s) (RR0.03, P = 0.07), port-site hernia (RD: 0.00, P = 0.68), ileus (RR 0.74, P = 0.51), SSI (RR 1.38, P = 0.28), post-operative intra-abdominal collection (RR 0.00, P = 0.62), LOS (MD -2.41, P = 0.16), readmission to the hospital (RR 0.45, P = 0.22), and return to theatre (RR 0.00, P = 0.49). Trial sequential analysis demonstrated that the meta-analysis is conclusive for most of the outcomes, except LOS and intra-abdominal collection.

CONCLUSION

Although SPLA is associated with a slightly longer operative time, its efficacy and safety are comparable to CLA in management of uncomplicated appendicitis. Moreover, it offers improved post-operative cosmesis. The available evidence is conclusive, and further trials may not be required.

Needlescopic Appendectomy in Children and Adolescents Using 14-Gauge Needles: A New Era

Purpose: We are presenting a very minimally invasive technique for laparoscopic appendectomy (needlescopic appendectomy [NAP]) in children and adolescents using suture grasper device, epidural needle, and homemade isolated long diathermy probe without any conventional laparoscopic instruments. Patients and Methods: NAP was attempted in 48 patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis at Al-Azhar, Tanta University Hospitals and other allied hospitals during the period from May 2017 to November 2018. The study included patients with acute appendicitis and patients scheduled for interval appendectomy. Exclusion criteria were patients with concealed appendix, patients with appendicular abscess or appendicular mass, patients with acute appendicitis complicated with generalized peritonitis, and patients unfit for laparoscopy. The appendix was brought outside through the umbilical port and the operation was completed extracorporeally. In cases of appendicitis with tethered cecum, the whole procedure was completed intracorporeally. Results: Forty-eight patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis were treated by NAP. They were 36 males and 12 females with a mean age of 9 ± 3.7 years (range = 4-15 years). Two cases with concealed appendix and one case with appendicular mass were diagnosed during initial laparoscopy and excluded from the study. Thirty-two cases (71.11%) were completed intracorporeally and 13 cases (28.89%) were completed by extracorporeal NAP. The mean operative time was 33.29 ± 3.95 minutes (range = 27-40 minutes) for intracorporeal NAP and 20.9 ± 7.01 minutes (range = 14-40 minutes) for extracorporeal NAP. Degrees of cosmetic satisfaction of the patients and parents were excellent in 93.33% (N = 42/45 patients), and very good in 6.67% (N = 3/45 patients) of patients. Conclusion: NAP using needles only is a new technique that is very minimally invasive, very cheap, safe, reproducible, and easy to be done with outstanding cosmetic results.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for appendiceal mucocele: a series of 116 patients

BACKGROUND

Although the safety and feasibility of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for appendiceal mucocele (AM) has been reported, studies on single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for AM have not been reported. Here, we aimed to compare the perioperative and short-term outcomes between SILS and CLS for AM and to evaluate the oncological safety of SILS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients, diagnosed based on computed tomography findings, who underwent laparoscopic surgery for AM between 2010 and 2018 at one institution. We excluded patients strongly suspected of having malignant lesions and those with preoperative appendiceal perforation. Patients were divided into two groups-CLS and SILS. Pathological outcomes and long-term results were investigated. The median follow-up period was 43.7 (range: 12.3-118.5) months.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 116 patients (CLS = 68, SILS = 48) were enrolled. Patient demographic characteristics did not differ between the groups. The preoperative mucocele diameter was greater in the CLS than in the SILS group (3.2 ± 2.9 cm vs. 2.3 ± 1.4 cm, P = 0.029). More extensive surgery (right hemicolectomies and ileocecectomies) was performed in the CLS than in the SILS group (P = 0.014). Intraoperative perforation developed in only one patient per group. For appendectomies and cecectomies, the CLS group exhibited a longer operation time than the SILS group (63.3 ± 24.5 min vs. 52.4 ± 17.3 min, P = 0.014); the same was noted for length of postoperative hospital stay (2.9 ± 1.8 days vs. 1.7 ± 0.6 days, P < 0.001). The most common AM etiology was low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (71/116 [61.2%] patients); none of the patients exhibited mucinous cystadenocarcinoma. Among these 71 patients, there were 8 patients with microscopic appendiceal perforation or positive resection margins. No recurrence was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

SILS for AM is feasible and safe perioperatively and in the short-term and yields favorable oncological outcomes. Despite the retrospective nature of the study, SILS may be suitable after careful selection of AM patients.

Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port approach for acute appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate comparative outcomes of single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (SPLA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (CLA) in the management of acute appendicitis in children.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with subsequent meta-analysis of outcomes were conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards. Operative time, surgical site infection, intra-abdominal collection, incisional hernia, length of hospital stay (LOS), additional port/s and conversion to open were the evaluated outcome parameters.

RESULTS

Four RCTs reporting a total number of 520 patients who underwent SPLA (n = 260) or CLA (n = 260) were included. There was no difference between SPLA and CLA group in post-operative collection (risk difference (RD) - 0.00, P = 0.94), surgical site infection (RD 0.02, P = 0.25), incisional hernia (RD 0.00 P = 1), LOS (mean difference (MD) 0.73 P = 0.93), need for additional port/s (RD 0.04, P = 0.24) and conversion to open (RD 0.00, P = 1). However, there was a significantly longer operative time in the SPLA group (MD 9.80, P = 0.00001). The certainty of the evidence was judged to be moderate for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

SPLA and CLA seem to have comparable efficacy and safety in children with acute appendicitis although the former may be associated with longer procedure time. Future high-quality RCTs with adequate sample sizes are required to provide stronger evidence in favour of an intervention.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis during pregnancy

AIM OF STUDY

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric surgical problem in pregnant patients. As minimally invasive surgery has developed, minimising surgical trauma and improving cosmetic outcomes have led to the development of single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of SPLS for acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between September 2014 and May 2016, 12 pregnant patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis and having single-port laparoscopic appendectomy were included in the study.

RESULTS

The median gestational age at surgery was 16 weeks (6-30 weeks). All operations were completed safely and without vascular or visceral injury. Four patients (33.3%) required conversion to a reduced-port laparoscopic surgery with 3 patients (25%) having a 5 mm port inserted because of perforated appendicitis with drain placement, and 1 patient (8.3%) having a 2-mm needle instrument insertion. Median operation time was 60 min (32-100 min), and a drainage tube was placed in 5 patients (41.7%). Median total length of incision was 2 cm (1.2-2.5 cm). The median time to soft diet initiation and length of stay in the hospital were 1 day (0-9 days) and 5 days (2-11 days), respectively. Two patients (8.0%) developed post-operative complications: One wound site bleeding and two surgical site infections. One case of abortion (8.3%) was noted on the post-operative day 1 and one case of imperforate hymen was noted after delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

SPLS appendectomy is feasible and safe for treating patients with acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

Surgical rectus sheath block combined with multimodal pain management reduces postoperative pain and analgesic requirement after single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of multimodal postoperative pain management, performing a surgical rectus sheath (RS) block via ropivacaine injection into the surgical field after single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA).

METHODS

Patients who underwent single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) for acute appendicitis were divided into three groups and compared: group 1 (multimodal pain management that included intraoperative application of a surgical RS block), group 2 (conventional pain management with intravenous opioids), or group 3 (multimodal pain management without RS block). Forty, 53, and 42 patients were registered, respectively (Table 1).

RESULTS

Time to start a liquid (1.2 ± 0.4 h) in group 1 was statistically significantly shorter than that in group 2 (16.3 ± 8.4 h; p < 0.001) and group 3 (4.93 ± 2.3 h; p < 0.001). The median and max postoperative VAS scores in group 1 (1.6 ± 1.2 and 2.2 ± 1.8, respectively) were statistically significantly lower than that in group 2 (3.0 ± 1.2 and 4.2 ± 1.9, respectively; p < 0.001 on both accounts) and group 3 (2.9 ± 0.6 and 3.4 ± 1.2, respectively; p < 0.001 on both accounts). The postoperative hospital stay for group 1 (17.0 ± 9.4 h) was shorter than that for group 2 (44.7 ± 27.9 h; p < 0.001) and group 3 (35.4 ± 20.9 h; p < 0.001). RS block was a significant factor for reducing length of hospital stay and postoperative pain in 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

A surgical RS block combined with multimodal pain management after SILA is a safe and effective method that results in reduced postoperative pain and shorter hospitalization.

Easily Applicable Single-incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy Using Straightforward Instrumental Alignment and Conventional Laparoscopic Instruments

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the most frequently performed operations. As such, single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is indicated as a feasible and safe procedure comparable to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). However, novice surgeons face challenges in performing SILA, because the role of the surgeon's hands is reversed. We introduce an easily applicable technique of SILA by adapting the alignment of CLA.

METHODS

A series of 61 consecutive patients underwent SILA between January 2019 and December 2019 by 4 surgeons at Bundang CHA Medical Center. Acute appendicitis was diagnosed preoperatively by abdomino-pelvis computed tomography or ultrasonography. During the operation, a 3-channel Glove port was used with conventional laparoscopic instruments.

RESULTS

The study participants consisted of 32 males and 29 females, with a mean age of 26.8 years (range, 4 to 66 y). The mean body mass index was 20.79 kg/m2 (range, 11.89 to 27.04 kg/m2). The mean operation time was 37.5±17.0 minutes. There was only 1 case of conversion with 1 additional port. Eight patients (13.1%) experienced postoperative complications defined by Dindo-Clavien-Strasberg classification: grade 1 wound complication in 7 patients and grade 2 postoperative bowel obstruction in 1 patient. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 2.5±1.3 days.

CONCLUSION

Alignment of the instruments during CLA was successfully implemented into a SILA. Our new, easily applicable SILA technique will decrease the learning curve for novice surgeons in performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery.

Comparing the Postoperative Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Three Port Appendectomy With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Acute Appendicitis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and 3-port conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol.

METHODS

Of 101 laparoscopic appendectomy with ERAS protocol cases for appendicitis from March 2019 to April 2020, 54 patients underwent SILA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 1) while 47 patients received CLA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 2). SILA and CLA were compared with the single institution's ERAS protocol. To adjust for baseline differences and selection bias, operative outcomes and complications were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM, well-matched 35 patients in each group were evaluated. Postoperative hospital stays for patients in group 1 (1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.037) were significantly lesser than those for patients in group 2. However, opioid consumption (2.0 mg vs. 1.4 mg, P=0.1) and the postoperative scores of visual analogue scale for pain at 6 hours (2.4±1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.260) and 12 hours (2.4 ± 2.0 vs. 2.9 ± 1.5, P = 0.257) did not show significant difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

SILA resulted in shortening the length of hospitalization without increase in complications or readmission rates compared to CLA with ERAS protocol.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe procedure for beginners to perform: experience from 1948 cases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SIL-A) has recently become an option for treating appendicitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and surgical outcomes of SIL-A by residents and surgeons during the learning period.

METHODS

A total of 1948 consecutive patients who underwent SIL-A from May 2008 to November 2014 were studied retrospectively. Surgeries were performed by residents and eight surgeons. Prior to the first case, surgeons and residents had been trained in a training protocol during the learning period. Three initial cases of SIL-A were performed under the supervision of experienced surgeons. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (learning period, n = 483), the first 40 cases by each surgeon and resident; and group 2 (experienced period, n = 1465), cases after the 40th procedure performed by each surgeon. Surgical results were compared between the two groups by performing propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in patient demographics and characteristics of appendicitis between the two groups. The operating time was longer in group 1 than in group 2 (45.3 ± 18.0 vs. 33.9 ± 16.1 min, p < 0.001). The morbidity rate (7.0% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.795) was similar between the two groups. Readmission rate (2.1% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.414) and reoperation rate (0.8% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.348) were also similar between the two groups. However, the rate of incisional hernia occurrence (0.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.066) tended to be larger in group 1 than in group 2 without showing a significant difference.

CONCLUSION

SIL-A is a technically feasible and safe procedure when it is performed by residents and surgeons during learning period under an appropriate training protocol. However, residents and surgeons in the learning period should perform it carefully to prevent incisional hernias.

Reduced-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbidly Obese Japanese Patients: a Retrospective Case-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery remains controversial due to technical challenges that can lead to suboptimal outcomes, and data pertaining to operative and clinical outcomes of reduced-port sleeve gastrectomy (RPSG) vs. conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG) are lacking.

AIMS

This retrospective case-matched study aimed to compare midterm (2-year) outcomes of RPSG and of CLSG.

METHODS

Patients included in the study had undergone laparoscopic bariatric surgery at our center between 2010 and 2017. Thirty-one consecutive female patients who underwent RPSG were compared to a sex-, age-, body mass index-matched group of 31 patients who underwent CLSG. Outcomes were evaluated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Estimated blood loss volume, incidences of intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Operation time was significantly greater in the RPSG group than in the CLSG group (148.7 ± 22.6 vs. 120.2 ± 25.9 min, respectively; p < 0.001). Excess weight loss at 1 year was 105.9% and 109.7%, respectively (p = 0.94) and at 2 years was 101.1% and 105.3%, respectively (p = 0.64). One RPSG patient required placement of additional trocars because of bleeding from short gastric vessels, but conversion to open surgery was not required.

CONCLUSIONS

RPSG is feasible in carefully selected bariatric patients and results in midterm outcomes comparable to those observed after CLSG. Good cosmesis is a potential benefit of RPSG.

Safety and Efficacy of Single-Port Laparoscopic Ileostomy in Palliative Settings

Purpose

Single-port laparoscopic techniques can be optimized with confined incisions. This approach has an intraoperative advantage of excellent visualization of the correct intestinal segment for exteriorization, along with direct visual control of the extraction to avoid twisting. However, only a few studies have verified the efficacy of the technique. Thus, this study assessed the results of single-port laparoscopic stoma creation for fecal diversion, specifically focusing on feasibility, safety, and efficacy.

Methods

Patients who underwent single-incision enterostomy performed by a single surgeon were included. Data on demographics, indications for and chosen procedure, and operation results were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

Results

Between April 2015 and January 2018, a total of 13 patients (8 males, 5 females) with a mean age of 57.7 years (range, 41–83 years) underwent single-port ileostomy creation. The most common reason for diversion was palliative ileostomy for colon obstruction or fistula from peritoneal malignancy (n = 12), followed by colonic fistula with necrotizing pancreatitis (n = 1). There were no cases of conversion to open or multiport laparoscopic surgery. The mean operative time was 54 minutes (range, 37–118 minutes), and the median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range, 2–211 days). A postoperative complication, aspiration pneumonia, was documented in 1 patient and treated conservatively. The mean duration of bowel movement was 0.7 days (range, 0–4 days). All stomas had good function, and there was no 30-day mortality.

Conclusion

Single-port laparoscopic ileostomy in patients with a palliative setting could be a safe and feasible option for fecal diversion.

Needlescopic Appendectomy in Children and Adolescents Using 14G Needles: A New Era

Purpose: We are presenting a new very minimally invasive technique for laparoscopic appendectomy (needlescopic appendectomy [NAP]) in children and adolescents using suture grasper device, epidural needle, and homemade isolated long diathermy probe without any conventional laparoscopic instruments. Patients and Methods: NAP was attempted in 48 patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis at Al-Azhar, Tanta University Hospitals and other allied hospitals during the period from May 2017 to November 2018. The study included patients with acute appendicitis and patients scheduled for interval appendectomy. Exclusion criteria were patients with concealed appendix, patients with appendicular abscess or appendicular mass, patients with acute appendicitis complicated with generalized peritonitis, and patients unfit for laparoscopy. The appendix was brought outside through the umbilical port and the operation was completed extracorporeally. In cases of appendicitis with tethered cecum, the whole procedure was completed intracorporeally. Results: Forty-eight patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis were treated by NAP. They were 36 males and 12 females with a mean age 9 ± 3.7 years (range = 4-15 years). Two cases with concealed appendix and one case with appendicular mass were diagnosed during initial laparoscopy and excluded from the study. Thirty-two cases (71.11%) were completed intracorporeally and 13 cases (28.89%) were completed by extracorporeal NAP. Mean operative time was 33.29 ± 3.95 minutes (range = 27-40 minutes) for intracorporeal NAP and 20.9 ± 7.01 minutes (range = 14-40 minutes) for extracorporeal NAP. Degrees of cosmetic satisfaction of the patients and parents were excellent in 93.33% (N = 42/45 patients), and very good in 6.67% (N = 3/45 patients) of patients. Conclusion: NAP using needles only is a new technique that is very minimally invasive, very cheap, safe, reproducible, and easy to be done with outstanding cosmetic results.

The Effects of Preoperative Pain Education on the Decision to Discharge Patients Following Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Purpose

Few studies have analyzed the effects of preoperative pain education on the postoperative decision to discharge. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of pain education and management on the decision to discharge patients after single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA).

Methods

We analyzed 135 patients who had undergone SILA for acute appendicitis between March 2017 and April 2018 in a single medical center. Of these, 72 patients (53.3%) had received preoperative pain education (group 1), and 63 (46.7%) had not (group 2). We compared perioperative outcomes and complications between the groups.

Results

Baseline characteristics of sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, and systemic inflammation factors (neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein level) did not differ significantly between the groups. There were no postoperative complications for patients in either group. Perioperative consequences and pathologic findings were not significantly different between the groups; however, length of hospital was significantly shorter in group 1.

Conclusion

Preoperative pain education in relation to postoperative pain management influenced the decision to shorten the postoperative hospital length of stay after SILA.

Risk factors for additional port insertion in single-port laparoscopic appendectomy

Introduction

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) was expected to have reduced risk of wound infection, less postoperative pain, and improved patient’s satisfaction with better cosmesis compared with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). When SPLA is converted to CLA, the additional incision for another port insertion can lead to a decrease in the surgical advantages and clinical benefit.

Aim

To evaluate risk factors for conversion to CLA during SPLA.

Material and methods

Between August 2015 and December 2016, patients who underwent intended SPLA were retrospectively reviewed. Conversion was defined as any insertion of an additional port, and complicated appendicitis was defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, abscess, or peritonitis in preoperative computed tomography. Postoperative complication was defined as any deviation in the routine postoperative course within 30 days postoperatively.

Results

Of 409 patients, 65 (15.9%) were treated with additional port insertion. The overall complication rate was 1.5% in each group, of which 1 patient developed superficial SSI and 4 patients developed deep surgical site infections in the SPLA group. After univariable and multivariable analysis, old age, male sex, increased serum C-reactive protein (OR = 2.944; 95% CI: 1.433–6.047; p = 0.003), and complicated appendicitis (OR = 3.330; 95% CI: 1.304–8.503; p = 0.012) were significant risk factors for conversion to CLA.

Conclusions

The conversion rate to CLA was 15.9%. Serum C-reactive protein level and complicated appendicitis were strong predictive factors for conversion from SPLA in acute appendicitis.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

METHODS

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

Single-Incision, Two-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy as an Alternative to Transumbilical Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Purpose

We designed a modified technique to perform an advanced procedure using conventional instruments and did not employ specialized single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) port equipment. We compared postoperative results for transumbilical, single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA) and single-incision, 2-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SITPLA).

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled 77 patients who underwent TUSPLA or SITPLA to provide more minimally invasive surgery between May 2017 and April 2018. TUSPLA was performed in 39 patients and 38 underwent SITPLA. In the SITPLA group, two 5-mm trocars were inserted through the umbilicus and an extra puncture site was used for a left-handed instrument. Demographic characteristics, operative data, and postoperative outcomes were collected and compared between the groups.

Results

The mean total operative time in the SITPLA group was shorter than in the TUSPLA group (p=0.003). The mean laparoscopic instrumental time was also shorter (p<0.001) in the SITPLA. The number of postoperative analgesics in the SITPLA group was less than in the TUSPLA group (p=0.002). The length of hospital day after surgery was shorter in the SITPLA group than in the TUSPLA group (p=0.008). There were no other significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion

SITPLA had a shorter operative time, required less pain management, and had a similar cosmetic outcome when compared with TUSPLA.

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

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

Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy versus double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A 1-year randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Management of appendicitis has evolved dramatically in the last 120 years, from McBurney's large incision to minimally invasive laparoscopic appendectomy to hardly noticeable incisions with SILS. As a bridge between conventional laparoscopic surgery and SILS, double-incision laparoscopic surgery further minimizes the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery by reducing the number of incisions. This study aimed to establish the efficacy of double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (DILA) as an alternative to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients were divided randomly into two groups: the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) group and the DILA appendectomy group. Demographics, diagnostic history, additional intraoperative findings, and duration of operation were recorded. Postoperative pain after 6 h and 24 h and cosmetic outcome after the surgery were also evaluated. Statistical analysis was done using Fisher's exact test, χ² test, and Student's t-test.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed in demographic and clinical characteristics in either group (P > 0.05). No significant difference in mean postoperative pain was observed between the two groups at 6 h (P = 0.62) or 24 h (P = 0.484). However, patients in the DILA group were more satisfied with their cosmetic outcomes than those in the CLA group (P = 0.04). The mean operative time was 26.4 min in the CLA group and 27.6 min in the DILA group (P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

DILA can be performed with operative outcomes that are equivalent to CLA but with superior cosmetic outcomes.

Single-port laparoscopic surgery in uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is an alternative, minimally invasive surgical approach for managing appendicitis. The aim of this randomized trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SPLS in uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHODS

Between December 2009 and November 2010, 194 patients with radiologically diagnosed acute appendicitis were randomly allocated to undergo either SPLS or multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS). Patients with intraoperative findings of perforated appendicitis were excluded from the analysis. The primary endpoint was perioperative morbidity. All data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

Fourteen cases were excluded from the analysis. Of the remaining 180 patients, 90 were assigned to the SPLS group, and 90 to the MPLS group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. In the SPLS group, the rate of conversion to MPLS was 11.1%. The operation time was 14.5 min longer for SPLS than for MPLS (p < 0.01), but there was no between-group difference in the rate of intraoperative complications (SPLS, 4.4%; MPLS, 0%; p = 0.12) or postoperative complications (SPLS, 4.4%; MPLS, 2.2%; p = 0.68). Compared to the MPLS group, the SPLS group had higher cumulative dose of analgesics (tramadol; 73.9 vs. 51.7 mg, p = 0.04), longer postoperative time to first passage of flatus (27.7 vs. 20.1 h, p < 0.01), longer postoperative hospitalization (2.5 vs. 2.1 days, p < 0.05), and higher total cost (1826.9 vs. 1662.4 USD, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized trial indicates that, compared to MPLS, SPLS does not increase the rate of perioperative or postoperative complications in uncomplicated appendicitis, but may have disadvantages such as increased operation time, later postoperative functional recovery, longer hospital stay, and higher costs, although the difference is minimal (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01007318).

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

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

Prospective Comparison and Quality of Life for Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in a Series of Morbidly Obese Patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has gained a wide acceptance in the surgical community with an increasing popularity in the field of bariatric surgery. Simultaneously more surgeons have become acquainted with the single port techniques and sleeve gastrectomy has been regarded as an ideal field of application. Literature is scarce about operative and clinical outcomes of single port sleeve gastrectomy compared to conventional laparoscopy. The primary purpose of the study was to compare operative outcomes in the two study groups. Assessment and comparison of functional outcomes in terms of quality of life between groups was also performed.

METHODS

Prospective data on 130 consecutive patients who underwent randomized SI or CL sleeve gastrectomy were collected between January 2009 to December 2014. Preoperative parameters, outcomes, post-operative functional results and quality of life, according to the short-form SF-36 questionnaire, were evaluated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

65 patients underwent conventional laparoscopic (CL) and 65 single incision (SI) sleeve gastrectomy. Operative time, post-operative pain, in-hospital stay, and complications were similar in the two groups. No difference emerged with respect to passage of flatus and resumption of oral intake (p = NS). Cosmetic results were excellent in SI patients with higher satisfaction rates. Post-operative quality of life was significant higher compared to baseline (p < 0.05), and comparable between the two procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Single incision sleeve gastrectomy is safe, effective and comparable to the conventional laparoscopic technique in terms of outcomes. Post-operative quality of life is comparable between the two procedures.

Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA) is considered the new golden standard for the treatment of acute appendicitis. However, single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) can further reduce the number of abdominal incisions and visible scars.

METHODS

Major databases were researched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing SILA and CTLA for acute appendicitis from January 1983 and to March 2015. The technical feasibility, effectiveness, and safety between SILA and CTLA were compared. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects models.

RESULTS

In total, 11 RCTs with 1489 patients were analyzed. The patients in the SILA group had a significantly shorter hospital duration (WMD: -0.63; 95% CI: -1.04, -0.21; P = 0.003) and return to activity (WMD: -2.91; 95% CI: -5.45, -0.37; P = 0.02) but experienced a longer operating time (WMD: 6.56; 95% CI: 3.55, 9.58; P < 0.0001) and higher rate of conversion (OR: 6.82; 95% CI: 3.14, 14.79; P < 0.00001). There were no differences between the two groups in visual analog pain scores, doses of analgesics, overall complication rates, wound infection, or cosmesis (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

SILA is a safer and more effective than CTLA in both pediatric and adult patients.

Interventions to optimize recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

No enhanced recovery after surgery protocol has been published for laparoscopic appendectomy. This was a review of evidence-based interventions that could optimize recovery after appendectomy.

METHODS

Interventions for the review Clinical pathway, fast-track or enhanced recovery protocols; needlescopic approach; single incision laparoscopic (SIL) approach; natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES); regional nerve blocks; intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA); drains. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science Core Collection. Study eligibility criteria Randomized controlled trial (RCT); prospective evaluation with historical controls for studies assessing clinical pathways/protocols. Participants People undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Meta-analysis, random effects model.

RESULTS

Clinical pathways for laparoscopic appendectomy were safe in selected patients, but may be associated with a higher readmission rate. Needlescopic surgery offered no recovery advantage over traditional laparoscopic appendectomy. SIL afforded no recovery advantage over conventional laparoscopic surgery, but may increase operative time in children. The search found no RCT on NOTES appendectomy. Transversus abdominis plane blocks did not significantly reduce pain after laparoscopic appendectomy. IPLA should be considered in laparoscopic appendectomy; studies in paediatric surgery are needed. The search found no RCT on the use of drains in appendectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified gaps in the literature on optimizing recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy and found the need for more randomized controlled trials on regional anaesthesia and intraperitoneal local anaesthesia in children.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Transumbilical laparoscopically assisted extracorporeal appendectomy in children and young adults: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

To compare surgical outcomes of pediatric patients aged 0-15 with acute appendicitis treated with single-port, transumbilical, extracorporeal laparoscopically assisted appendectomy (SP) with young adult patients aged 16-21.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single center retrospective chart review in patients 21 years and younger with a pre-operative diagnosis of appendicitis who underwent SP between January 2010 and December 2015. Patients were divided into two groups based on age. Operative time (OT), length of stay (LOS), cost, rates of conversion to standard three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TP), and rates of infection were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

SP was performed in a total of 263 patients: 211 in pediatric patients aged 0-15 and 52 in patients aged 16-21. Age groups did not differ significantly on cost, LOS, operative time, rates of conversion to TP, or rates of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

SP has comparable surgical outcomes in adolescent, adult, and pediatric patients.

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.

Single incision laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Appendicectomy is a well-established surgical procedure used in the management of acute appendicitis. The operation can be performed with minimally invasive surgery or as an open procedure. A further development in the minimally invasive appendicectomy technique has been the introduction of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILA).

AIM

To ascertain any differences in outcomes from available trials comparing SILA with conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy (CLA).

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE/Ovid and CENTRAL for articles from Jan1990 to June 2015 with key words: 'appendectomy', 'appendicetomy'; 'appendicitis'; 'laparoscopy'; 'keyhole'; 'single port'; 'single incision'; 'single site'; 'one port'; 'incisionless'; 'scarless'. Randomised control trials of patients with signs and symptoms of appendicitis undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy, with one arm being SILA were included. Statistical analysis was performed through Mantle-Haenszel and inverse variance methods.

RESULTS

A total of 8 RCTs published between 2012 and 2014 with a total of 995 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant differences between SILA and CLA for complication rates, post-operative ileus, length of hospital stay, return to work or post-operative pain. CLA was significantly superior to SILA with reduced operating time (mean difference 5.81 [2.01, 9.62] P = 0.003) and conversion rates (OR 4.14 [1.93, 8.91] P = 0.0003). SILA surgery had better wound cosmesis (mean difference 0.55 [0.33, 0.77] P = 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

SILA is comparable to CLA in terms of complications, post-operative pain and recovery. Therefore, SILA could be a viable option in the hands of an experienced surgeons and for patients' groups who place great value on the final cosmetic outcome.

Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy in a small hospital

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) for the treatment of acute appendicitis and to assess the feasibility of performing SILA in a small hospital with limited surgical instruments and staff experience.

METHODS

Retrospective record review identified 133 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy from December 2013 to April 2015. Patients were categorized according to the type of appendectomy performed (SILA or CLA). Patient characteristics and surgical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Postoperative complication rates were compared using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Postoperative pain was assessed using a visual analog scale immediately postsurgery; at 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours postoperatively, and at 7 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

Record review identified 38 patients who had undergone SILA and 95 patients who had undergone CLA. No significant differences in clinical characteristics were found between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in operation time, time to flatus, or length of hospital stay. Overall complication rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups. No complications worse than grade IIIa occurred in the SILA group. Postoperative pain scores were not significantly different between the 2 groups at any time point.

CONCLUSION

We found comparable surgical outcomes for SILA compared to CLA. Even in a small hospital with limited surgical instruments and staff experience, SILA may be a feasible and safe technique.

A history of the treatment of appendicitis in children: lessons learned

During the latter half of the 19th century, surgeons increasingly reported performing appendicectomies. Fitz from Harvard, Groves from Canada and Tait from Britain all recorded successful removal of the appendix. McBurney described the point of maximal tenderness in classic appendicitis and also the muscle-splitting incision centred on this point. Priority is given to McArthur in describing the lateral muscle-splitting incision. The direction of the cutaneous incision was later modified by Elliott and Lanz. Incisions that healed well were essential to recovery. Appendicectomy became a 'fashionable' operation after the London surgeon, Treves, removed the appendix of King Edward VII. Through the 20th century, the mortality from appendicitis fell notably with the advent of sulphonamide and penicillin, improvements in fluid therapy and safer anaesthesia. By 1990, diagnostic delay was the main cause of death. Semm performed the first laparoscopic appendicectomy in 1990, roundly criticized at the time for what is now a routine procedure. We view contemporary debates on the indications for appendicectomy, the best approach and how to optimize recovery in the light of the history of this intriguing disease.

Single-incision laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for the treatment of multiple recurrent inguinal hernias

Introduction:

Despite an exponential rise in laparoscopic surgery for inguinal herniorrhaphy, overall recurrence rates have remained unchanged. Therefore, an increasing number of patients present with recurrent hernias after having failed anterior and laparoscopic repairs. This study reports our experience with single-incision laparoscopic (SIL) intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for these hernias.

Materials and methods:

All patients referred with multiply recurrent inguinal hernias underwent SIL-IPOM from November 1 2009 to October 30 2013. A 2.5-cm infraumbilical incision was made and a SIL surgical port was placed intraperitoneally. Modified dissection techniques, namely, “chopsticks” and “inline” dissection, 5.5 mm/52 cm/30° angled laparoscope and conventional straight dissecting instruments were used. The peritoneum was incised above the symphysis pubis and dissection continued laterally and proximally raising an inferior flap, below a previous extraperitoneal mesh, while reducing any direct/indirect/femoral/cord lipoma before placement of antiadhesive mesh that was fixed into the pubic ramus as well as superiorly with nonabsorbable tacks before fixing its inferior border with fibrin sealant. The inferior peritoneal flap was then tacked back onto the mesh.

Results:

There were 9 male patients who underwent SIL-IPOM. Mean age was 55 years old and mean body mass index was 26.8 kg/m². Mean mesh size was 275 cm². Mean operation time was 125 minutes with hospital stay of 1 day and umbilical scar length of 21 mm at 4 weeks' follow-up. There were no intraoperative/postoperative complications, port-site hernias, chronic groin pain, or recurrence with mean follow-up of 20 months.

Conclusions:

Multiply recurrent inguinal hernias after failed conventional anterior and laparoscopic repairs can be treated safely and efficiently with SIL-IPOM.

Suprapubic single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SSILA), a promising new approach with potential benefits such as improved cosmetic results, has been preliminarily shown to be safe and feasible in previous single-arm studies. This study used a propensity-matched analysis to compare SSILA and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS

Patients undergoing SSILA between March 2012 and November 2013 were matched with patients undergoing CLA during the same period at a single institution. These patient groups were compared using a propensity score analysis. The model covariates for the propensity scores included gender, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, history of abdominal operation, and pathology of the resected appendix. The clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups, and the cosmetic results were evaluated via a patient scar assessment questionnaire and an objective scar evaluation scale.

RESULTS

No patient in either group required additional port placement or conversion to open surgery. One patient in the SSILA group developed a wound infection, and one patient in the CLA group developed a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess. No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to the length of hospital stay, time to semi-liquid diet, time to first flatus or hospital cost. The operative time and the number of patients requiring postoperative analgesics were greater with SSILA. Compared with CLA, SSILA was associated with better scores in the patient scar assessment questionnaire consciousness subscale and with similar scores in the appearance, satisfaction with appearance and satisfaction with symptoms subscales. The two approaches yielded similar results for the objective scar evaluation scale.

CONCLUSIONS

SSILA is a feasible and safe approach with similar outcomes as CLA. SSILA results in reduced scar consciousness at the expense of relatively longer operative times and more postoperative analgesic use.

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

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