Laparoscopic appendectomy in Switzerland: a prospective audit of 2, 179 cases

Staplers vs. loop-ligature: a cost analysis from the hospital payer perspective

BACKGROUND

Presently, there is equipoise regarding the surgical technique used to manage the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. The purpose of this research was to determine whether the routine use of loop ligature, compared to stapling, is cost effective from a hospital payer perspective.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted amongst patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis at two major academic hospitals. In order to eliminate possible systematic bias arising from one technique being preferentially employed with more complex presentations, patients were divided into study groups based on the technique routinely employed by their surgeon, loop ligature (LLA) versus stapler (LSA). Pediatric patients and open appendectomies were excluded. Costs were determined using a previously published model derived from publicly available data from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative, in conjunction with local cost data for disposable procurement. Secondary outcomes included operating room time, length of stay, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Between Jan 1, 2014 and Dec 31, 2015, 567 adult patients had an emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. In comparing surgeons who routinely employed LLA to LSA, there was a significant decrease in total mean hospital cost with LLA ($1988 ± $143 vs. $2253 ± $99, p = 0.002). In addition, mean disposable cost was reduced for surgeons using LLA ($310 ± $27 vs. $668 ± $26, p < 0.001). This reduction in cost was not associated with a difference in length of stay (1.5 vs. 1.4 days, p = 0.28) or complication rates (8% vs. 10%, p = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that surgeons who routinely use loop ligature to secure the appendiceal base during emergency laparoscopic appendectomy offer more cost-effective care compared to stapler users, saving their institution more than $200 per case with no clear disadvantages. A shift from routine use of staplers to loop ligature should result in significant overall cost savings to the hospital.

Laparoscopic appendectomy as a teaching procedure: experiences with 1,197 patients in a community hospital

PURPOSE

Since laparoscopic procedures have become more common, resident surgeons have to learn complex laparoscopic skills at an early stage of their career. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term clinical outcome parameters of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) performed by resident surgeons (RS) or attending surgeons (AS).

METHODS

A total of 1197 LA and 57 open appendectomies were performed in a Swiss community hospital between 1999 and 2009. RS performed 684 operations. Parameters including the duration of the operation and hospital stay, intraoperative complications, surgical reinterventions, and a 30-day morbidity and mortality were observed.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 35.6 ± 18.17 years. The duration of the operation was longer (61.34 ± 25.73 min [RS] vs. 53.65 ± 29.89 [AS] min; p = 0.0001), but the hospital stay was shorter, in patients treated by RS (3.92 ± 2.61 days [RS] vs. 4.87 ± 3.23 [AS] days; p = 0.0001). The rate of intraoperative complications was not significantly different between the two groups (1.02 % [RS] vs. 0.8 % [AS]; p = 0.6). The need for surgical reintervention (0.6 % [RS] vs. 2.5 % [AS]; p = 0.005) and the 30-day morbidity were higher in patients treated by AS (3.7 % [AS] vs. 1.8 % [RS]; p = 0.04). There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Under appropriate supervision, surgical residents are able to perform LA with results comparable to those of experienced surgeons.

Consensus conference on laparoscopic appendectomy: development of guidelines

AIM

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is not yet unanimously considered the gold standard treatment for appendicitis, despite the increasing use of advanced laparoscopic operations and the high incidence of the disease.

METHOD

Due to the results of an audit which classified LA as widespread in Italy, a Consensus Conference was organized, in order to give evidence-based answers to the most debated problems regarding the operation. After researching the literature, a panel of 20 experts were selected and interviewed on hot topics; a subsequent discussion using the Delphi methodology was utilized in the course of the consensus conference and submitted to the evaluation of an audience of surgeons.

RESULTS

Checkpoint statements were formulated whenever an agreement was reached. A level of evidence was then assigned to single statements and the process revised by two external reviewers.

CONCLUSION

Consensus development guidelines are herein reported and regard diagnostic pathway, diagnostic laparoscopy, indications, behaviour in case of innocent appendix, technical aspects, learning curve; however, some questions remain unsolved due to the lack of evidence.

Laparoscopic appendectomies: experience of a surgical unit

Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdomen in adults and appendectomy is the most common emergency abdominal procedure. Laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity only in recent years and the optimal approach for the treatment of acute appendicitis is still under debate. This retrospective study aimed at examining the current indications for laparoscopic appendectomy. 1024 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between February 1992 and December 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. 39.9% of patients (n=408) underwent emergency surgery. In 616 cases (60.1%) conservative management was performed in vain and these patients underwent an elective operation. In the 36 patients with an intraoperative normal appendix, other pathological findings were laparoscopically detected and treated. Conversion to an open procedure was required for 13 (1.3%) cases. The mean operative time was 38 min and the average length of postoperative hospitalization was 2.5 days. The overall morbidity rate was 2.6%. Laparoscopic appendectomy should be considered a procedure of choice for the treatment of non-complicated appendicitis. We stress the possibility to laparoscopically treat even complicated appendicitis in the surgical setting with substantial experience in minimally invasive surgery.

Use of retrieval bags in incidental gallbladder cancer cases

INTRODUCTION

Accidental intraoperative gallbladder perforation is a problem in laparoscopic surgery, especially in cases with incidental gallbladder carcinoma (IGBC). The question is whether intraoperative gallbladder perforation has a prognostic disadvantage or a retrieval bag provides protection against tumor dissemination.

METHODS

A standardized questionnaire was sent to all German surgical clinics based on the central register of "incidental gallbladder carcinoma" of the German Society of Surgery founded in 1997.

RESULTS

In 592 IGBC-registered cases, there were 330 laparoscopies, 154 open surgeries, and intraoperative conversion was performed in 106 cases. Of laparoscopic surgeries (n = 330), the recurrence rate was 30%. The recurrence rate for cases with (174/330) and without (156/330) the use of retrieval bag was 32.2% and 27%, respectively. In laparoscopies with intraoperative gallbladder perforation (73/330 cases), the recurrence rate was 38.4%. Of these cases the recurrence rate with (51/73) and without (22/73) the use of retrieval bags was 39.2% and 36.4%, respectively. In 257 cases without intraoperative perforation, tumor recurrence rate was 27.2%, and it was 29.3% or 25.4% with (123/257) and without (134/257) the use of retrieval bags.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the registry data, the intraoperative gallbladder perforation results in significant (P = 0.047) prognostic disadvantage and in these cases retrieval bags were used more often (P = 0.001). However, in IGBC cases if intraoperative gallbladder perforation has already happened, the use of retrieval bags had no protective effects.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: a comparison with open appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is widely performed in many countries, LA for complicated appendicitis, which includes perforated or gangrenous appendicitis with or without localized or disseminated peritonitis, has not become a common practice yet.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical records of 230 patients who had undergone appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: 141 had undergone LA, 84 had conventional open appendectomy (OA), and 5 patients had conversion to the open procedure after laparoscopy. The LA group (total LA) was subdivided into "early experience (early LA: cases 1-56)" and "late experience (late LA: case 57 and higher)." We defined the early LA group as the comparison group to minimize selection bias.

RESULTS

Patient demographics were similar in the early LA and OA groups (P > 0.05). Wound infection was significantly more frequent in the OA group (P < 0.05). Intra-abdominal infection was equally common in these two groups. The overall rate of postoperative complications was significantly higher in the OA group (32.1%) than in the early LA group (18%; P < 0.05). This incidence was 12.8% in the total LA group. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the early LA group (10.6 +/- 3.9 days; P < 0.05), and 8.9 +/- 3.7 days in the total LA group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that LA is safe and useful even for the treatment of complicated appendicitis if performed by an experienced surgeon.

Totally intracorporeal laparoscopic colorectal anastomosis using circular stapler

BACKGROUND

A number of surgical techniques for colorectal anastomosis have been described for laparoscopic left-sided colectomies. Due to the complexity of these procedures, open preparation of the proximal bowel for circular stapler anastomosis through a Pfannenstiel incision has become the gold standard. We report a new laparoscopic technique for totally intracorporeal colorectal circular anastomosis (TLCCA) using a circular stapler.

METHODS

Preliminary experience using TLCCA in three patients scheduled for laparoscopic left colectomies (two) and sigmoidectomy (one).

RESULTS

Side-to-end colorectal anastomosis through TLCCA was feasible in all patients scheduled for preliminary experience. Median time from anvil insertion into abdominal cavity to anastomosis was 14 (11-17) minutes. No postoperative complications were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Side-to-end anastomosis can be easily and safely performed using conventional circular stapler through TLCCA. TLCCA is performed using four laparoscopic ports without additional skin incision (except trocars incision) and allows the retrieval of surgical pieces through a specimen bag.

Abdominal emergencies: diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Securing the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: evidence for routine stapling?

BACKGROUND

This metaanalysis aimed to compare endoscopic linear stapling and loop ligatures used to secure the base of the appendix.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials on appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy were systematically searched and critically appraised. The results in terms of complication rates, operating time, and hospital stay were pooled by standard metaanalytic techniques.

RESULTS

Data on 427 patients from four studies were included. The operative time was 9 min longer when loops were used (p = 0.04). Superficial wound infections (odds ratio [OR], 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.71; p = 0.01) and postoperative ileus (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.89; p = 0.03) were significantly less frequent when the appendix stump was secured with staples instead of loops. Of 10 intraoperative ruptures of the appendix, 7 occurred in loop-treated patients (p = 0.46). Hospital stay and frequency of postoperative intraabdominal abscess also were comparable in loop-treated and staple-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical evidence on stump closure methods in laparoscopic appendectomy favors the routine use of endoscopic staplers.

Role of appendectomy in laparoscopic training

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate whether laparoscopic appendectomy is suitable for training residents to become proficient in laparoscopic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1574 laparoscopic appendectomies were performed at En-Chu-Kong Hospital between January 1998 and December 2003 (788 men and 786 women). These cases were divided into three groups: 543 cases (in 1998-1999) performed by 5 attending surgeons during the learning and trial stage; 536 cases (in 2000-2001) performed by 5 attending surgeons assisted by 2 senior residents with prior experience in open appendectomy; and 495 cases (in 2002-2003) done by these 2 senior residents, supervised by the attending surgeons. Demographic data, intraoperative findings, operative time, conversion rate, frequency of analgesic injection, timing of oral intake, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the operations performed by attending surgeons (mature stage) vs. senior residents in terms of intraoperative findings, operative time (60.1 +/- 60.4 minutes vs. 56.3 +/- 25.6 minutes), conversion rate (1.12% vs. 0.81%), frequency of analgesic injection (0.57 +/- 1.37 times/stay vs. 0.43 +/- 0.94 times/stay), timing of oral intake (23.7 +/- 30.2 hours vs. 20.8 +/- 27.5 hours), hospital stay (73.9 +/- 61.8 hours vs. 70.3 +/- 51.6 hours), morbidity, or mortality (0% vs. 0.2%).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely incorporated into the training of surgical residents under the supervision of experienced surgeons. Laparoscopic appendectomy also provides knowledge of the basics of laparoscopic technique before going on to more complex operations.

Laparoscope-assisted appendectomy in adults: the two-trocar technique

BACKGROUND

Open appendectomy is still the most common method of treating appendicitis. Laparoscopic procedures for removal of the appendix by the "in" technique as an alternative to conventional appendectomy have gained wide popularity, but have been criticized for their technical difficulty and high cost. We assessed the safety and efficacy of the laparoscope-assisted appendectomy (the two-trocar technique) in adults.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied 129 patients who had appendectomy using the laparoscope-assisted two-trocar technique between July 2002 to December 2003. The procedures were done by consultants and surgeons-in-training with experience in minimally invasive and open techniques. Locally modified endoloop and reusable trocars were used to reduce the cost. Appendectomy was performed extra-abdominally after the appendix was identified by using a laparoscope through one port and then delivered outside through the second port using reusable laparoscopy instruments.

RESULTS

The two-trocar technique was successful in 101 (78.3%) cases; 14 (10.8%) needed a third trocar to complete the operation extra-abdominally, 6 (4.6%) were converted to open surgery, and 5 (3.8%) had an intra-abdominal laparoscopic appendectomy. The mean operation time was 35 minutes (range, 30-90 minutes). Six cases (4.6%) had infection. The mean hospital stay was 2.8 days (range, 2-7 days). No case of port hernia was reported during the follow-up period (range, 14-30 months).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscope-assisted two-trocar technique for removal of the appendix can be performed as safely and efficiently as the open technique, but at a lower cost than the complete laparoscopic "in" method and does not need much technical expertise. This method is recommended as an alternative procedure to open appendectomy or the complete laparoscopic "in" technique in adults.

Subphrenic abscess resulting in resection of the lower basal segment of the right lung: a severe complication following laparoscopic appendectomy

We report the case of an 18-year-old boy who developed an intrathoracic abscess with rupture of the diaphragm following a laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for a perforated appendicitis. LA is an established procedure in the treatment of appendicitis. It is a safe and efficacious technique, but several complications can occur with this procedure, and surgeons should be aware of the potential dangers. Herein, we present a previously unreported thoracic complication following an LA.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy is associated with a lower complication rate even during the introductory phase

BACKGROUND

The benefit of laparoscopic appendicectomy is under debate. To study the beneficial clinical effects of laparoscopic appendicectomy during the introductory phase we analysed, retrospectively, 493 patients from one district general hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

During a period of 3 years 250 patients were operated on prospectively by open appendicectomy, and 243 patients were operated on laparoscopically. Both groups were compared with regard to their demographic data, operation time, body mass index and complication rate.

RESULTS

The conversion rate was 4.5%. The distribution of histological stages of inflammation was comparable in both groups. The median operating time was significantly longer for the open (40 min) than for the laparoscopic procedure (35 min, P=0.002). The body mass index in the laparoscopic group was significant higher (23.7 kg/m(2) vs 22.6 kg/m(2), P=0.009). Perioperative white blood cell count, C-reactive protein and body temperature were equal in both groups. There was no significant difference with regard to the analgesia required postoperatively between the open and the laparoscopic group. Nevertheless, the specific complication rate after open appendicectomy (18.4%) was significantly higher than that following laparoscopic appendicectomy (10.8%, P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

Even during the introductory phase, laparoscopic appendicectomy is a safe and clinically beneficial operating procedure.

Specimen retrieval in laparoscopic colon surgery

In the past decade, for benign as well as malignant colon diseases, minimally invasive surgery has gained more and more importance in colon surgery. Specimen retrieval after colonic resections is difficult due to the large size of the specimen usually resected. To date there is no standardized retrieval technique for the different procedures. Four incision sites are common for transabdominal specimen retrieval: left or right lower quadrant transrectal portside incision; periumbilical midline incision, and transverse suprapubic incision. Perineal incisions are used for retrieval following low anterior resection or abdomino-perineal extirpation. Three major complications are described in the literature: wound infection (0-9%); hernias (0-2%), and incision site recurrence (0-1.3%). There are no significant differences between the different incision sites with regard to the occurrence of complications. In laparoscopic surgery for malignant diseases retrieval is usually performed using a plastic bag, whereas retrieval can be performed hand-assisted without a bag during surgery for benign diseases. Wound edge protectors are recommended by several authors, yet there is no standard system which is accepted broadly. In conclusion, specimen retrieval in laparoscopic colon surgery is not standardized. The morbidity rate for specific retrieval complications ranges between 0 and 9%, yet there are no randomized controlled studies or evidence-based data regarding different retrieval approaches and systems.

Minilaparoscopic appendectomy

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using 2-mm laparoscopic instruments in the treatment of appendicitis and to identify risk factors that may limit their use. Minilaparoscopic appendectomy was performed through a 2-mm port in the umbilicus for a videoendoscope, a 2-mm working port in the right upper quadrant, and a 5/12-mm suprapubic port for an endoscopic stapler. Minilaparoscopic appendectomy was attempted in 26 consecutive patients with appendicitis. Thirty-two consecutive patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic appendectomy with 5- and 10-mm instruments and videoendoscopes before the availability of 2-mm instrumentation were analyzed for comparison. Statistical comparisons were made by the Student t test and Fisher exact test. Differences were considered statistically significant at a P value less than 0.05. There were no conversions to an open appendectomy in the minilaparoscopic appendectomy or conventional laparoscopic appendectomy group. The mean operative time was 69.5 minutes for the minilaparoscopic appendectomy group and 85.5 minutes for the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy group (P = 0.02). The mean postoperative length of stay was 1.7 days for the minilaparoscopic appendectomy group and 2.5 days for the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy group (P = 0.08). There was no significant difference in the complication rates (P = 0.31). Minilaparoscopic appendectomy was completed in 13 (50.0%) patients. Independent risk factors (P = 0.05) for conversion to 5- or 10-mm ports were a retrocecal appendix and increasing patient age. There were no differences in the mean postoperative length of stay (P = 0.12) or complication rate (P = 0.39) between the two groups, but mean operative time was longer (P = 0.05) in the converted group. Perioperative outcomes for minilaparoscopic appendectomy are comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. The use of 2-mm instrumentation in the management of appendicitis is limited in patients with retrocecal appendicitis. Increasing patient age and a history of abdominal surgery may influence the need to convert 2-mm ports to 5- or 10-mm ports.