Cost-Effective Approach to the Laparoscopic Appendectomy : Balancing Disposable Instrument Cost With Operative Time

Development and assessment of a loop ligation simulator for laparoscopic appendectomy

OBJECTIVE

Loop ligation of the appendix is a challenging surgical skill and well suited to be trained in a simulator. We aimed to develop an affordable and easy-to-build simulator and test its training effect.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Different materials were tested, and the best training modality was identified by researching the literature. The developed simulator training was tested on 20 surgical novices.

RESULTS

A video was produced including an instruction on how to build the simulator and a step-by-step tuition on how to ligate the appendix. The Peyton approach was utilized to guide learners. Training with the simulator leads to reliable skill acquisition. All participants improved significantly in completing the task successfully during the structured learning.

CONCLUSION

We succeeded in developing a simulator for loop ligation of the appendix during laparoscopic appendectomy. Participants significantly improve in handling the loops. The transferability of the skill learned during simulation to the operating room will be subject of a follow-up study.

Energy Devices for Clipless-Sutureless Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Utility and Safety

Background and Objectives: While laparoscopic appendectomy is standardized, techniques for appendiceal stump closure and mesoappendix division remain variable. Novel vessel sealing techniques are increasingly utilized ubiquitously. We sought to systematically summarize all relevant data and to define the current evidence on the safety and utility of energy devices for clipless−sutureless laparoscopic appendectomy in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: This review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Inclusion criteria included studies with laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis. The intervention included patients undergoing division of mesoappendix and/or securing of the appendicular base using diathermy (Monopolar or Bipolar or LigaSure Sealing Device) or Harmonic Scalpel (Group A) compared to patients undergoing division of mesoappendix and/or securing of the appendicular base using endoclip or Hem-o-lok or ligature (Group B). The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Downs and Black scale. The outcomes of surgical site infection (SSI) or intra-abdominal collection, postoperative ileus, average operative duration, and length of hospital stay (LHS) were compared. Results: Six comparative studies were included; three were retrospective, two were prospective, and one was ambispective. Meta-analysis revealed a shorter operative duration in Group A with respect to appendicular base ligation (MD −12.34, 95% CI −16.57 to −8.11, p < 0.00001) and mesoappendix division (MD −8.06, 95% CI −14.03 to −2.09, p = 0.008). The pooled risk ratios showed no difference in SSI between groups. Additionally, no difference was observed in LHS. The risk of postoperative ileus was higher in group B regarding mesoappendix division (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.93, p = 0.02), but no difference was found concerning appendicular base ligation. The included studies showed a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Conclusions: Clipless−sutureless laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and fast. Postoperative ileus seems less common with energy devices for mesoappendix division. However, the studies included have a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Further studies addressing the individual devices with surgeons of similar levels are needed.

Pet-owner perceptions of laparoscopy in an urban hybrid veterinary practice

OBJECTIVE

To investigate owner perceptions of laparoscopic surgery, including attitudes towards paying more for minimally invasive surgery (MIS).

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized cross-sectional prospective survey.

SAMPLE POPULATION

One hundred owners presenting at a combined general and specialty practice.

METHODS

Participants were interviewed using a survey tool to assess prior knowledge of laparoscopic procedures, attitude for or against these procedures, reasons for this attitude, and whether they would pay more for these procedures. Demographic data were collected.

RESULTS

Fifty-five percent of owners had previous knowledge of laparoscopy. Ninety-two percent of owners would choose laparoscopy over an open procedure for their pet. Reasons given for preferring laparoscopy: less postoperative pain (66.3%), shorter length of hospitalization (26.1%), better cosmesis (20.1%), perception of lower cost (15.2%), faster return to function (14.1%), length of anesthesia (5.4%), and other reasons (26.1%). Ninety-one percent of owners were willing to pay more for MIS. Among owners who indicated they would be willing to pay more, owners presenting with dogs were 2.5 times more likely to be willing to pay at least $1000 more than owners presenting with cats.

CONCLUSION

The majority of owners surveyed at a large hybrid hospital in an urban setting choose laparoscopic over open procedures and are willing to pay more for them.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The results highlight the importance of client and veterinarian education regarding the options of MIS for pets, as owners who are informed may prefer referral for these procedures. The financial investment to build a MIS practice may be justified.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nonoperative management versus open and laparoscopic surgery for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in Colombia

Background

Traditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis.

Methods

We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

Methods

We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer’s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results

LA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was $24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient.

Conclusions

LA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer’s perspective in the Colombian health system.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00288-2.

Comparison of Ultrasonic Dissection and Suture Ligation for Mesoappendix in Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Objective

To compare the use of ultrasonic dissector and suture ligation for mesoappendix in laparoscopic appendectomy in terms of mean operative time and per-operative bleed.

Methodology

This was a randomized controlled trial conducted at Surgical Unit II, Holy Family Hospital over a period of six months. All patients with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis who presented in the emergency department of Holy Family Hospital on the call days of Surgical Unit II undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy were included in the study. After taking informed consent about the respective procedure, patients were allocated to two groups using computer-generated random numbers. Group A was operated using harmonic scalpel and in Group B suture ligation was done. Total time required to ligate the mesoappendix or to cauterize it using the harmonic scalpel was measured in minutes. Data was entered and analyzed in SPSS version 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).

Results

A total of 110 patients were enrolled in the study according to the inclusion criteria of the study. Patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. Patients in Group A were operated using harmonic scalpel whereas patients in Group B were operated by suture ligation for dealing the mesoappendix in laparoscopic appendectomy. Mean operative time to ligate the mesoappendix for Group A patients was 1.56 (SD = 0.68) minutes while that of Group B was 21.07 (SD = 2.84) minutes. There was no per-operative bleeding in case of Group A while its incidence was 24% of patients in Group B. Results were statistically significant.

Conclusion

The conclusion of the study is that the use of harmonic scalpel was better than suture ligation for ligating the mesoappendix in laparoscopic appendectomy in terms of mean operative time and per operative bleed, hence it's preferable over the later in laparoscopic appendectomy.