Comparison of the results of laparoscopic appendectomies with application of different techniques for closure of the appendicular stump

Handmade Loop Versus Hem-o-Lok Clip in Closure of Appendiceal Stump During Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Limited Setting in a Peripheral University Hospital

Background: Today, laparoscopy is frequently used in abdominal emergencies such as acute appendicitis. There are several techniques used to close the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. We aimed to compare the use of handmade loop and Hem-o-lok used to close the appendiceal stump in public hospitals where resources are limited, in terms of surgical outcomes and cost. Methods: Between January 2020 and December 2022, patients for whom handmade loops and Hem-o-loks were used to close the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy in our clinic were included in the study. There were a total of 638 patients (mean age: 33 ± 13.5 years, 325 females and 313 males) in the patient cohort. Demographic and clinical data, duration of surgery, complications, hospital stay, pathology reports, mortality, and cost of supplies were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 308 patients in the handmade loop group (160 females, 148 males, mean age: 33.7 years, range: 18-85 years) and 330 patients in the Hem-o-lok group (166 females, 164 males, mean age: 32.5 years, range: 18-89 years). There was no significant difference between the two groups for American Society of Anesthesiologists score, duration of symptom, hospital stay, intensive care unit stay, preoperative laboratory values, histopathological results, mortality, and morbidity (P > .05). The mean operation time was 48.76 ± 16.16 minutes in the handmade loop group and 40.53 ± 11.63 minutes in the Hem-o-lok group (p = 0.001). In terms of cost, the cost per case of Hem-o-lok group was about 25.8 times as much as the group that used sutures ($31 versus $1.2). Conclusions: Both methods can be used safely in laparoscopic appendectomy. The use of Hem-o-lok has no advantage other than shortening the operation time. However, it is costlier. Especially in peripheral hospitals where resources are limited, closing the appendiceal stump using a handmade loop is an easy, safe, and cost-effective method.

Effect of endoscopic loop ties in acute appendicitis on wound infection rate: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis study to measure the consequence of endoscopic loop ties (ELT) in acute appendicitis (AA) on wound infection rate. A comprehensive literature inspection till February 2023 was applied and 2765 interrelated studies were reviewed. The 27 chosen studies enclosed 15 093 subjects with AA in the chosen studies' starting point, 7141 of them were ELT, and 7952 were open surgery. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compute the value of the effect of ELT in AA on wound infection rate by the dichotomous and continuous styles and a fixed or random model. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative surgical site wound infection (SSWI). (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.83, P = 0.009) with low heterogeneity (I2  = 34%) compared to ELT in AA subjects. Although no significant difference was detected between open surgery and ELT in intra-abdominal abscess rate (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.56-1.40, P = 0.59) with moderate heterogeneity (I2  = 51%) in AA subjects. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative SSWI, however, no significant difference was found in intra-abdominal abscess rate compared to ELT in AA subjects. However, caused by the small sample sizes of several chosen studies for this meta-analysis, care must be exercised when dealing with its values.

Factores asociados a la duración de la estancia hospitalaria posterior a la apendicectomía laparoscópica

Introducción. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar los factores asociados a la duración de la estancia hospitalaria posterior a una apendicectomía laparoscópica. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio observacional, analítico, retrospectivo, en el Hospital de Alta Complejidad “Virgen de la Puerta” en Trujillo, Perú, entre 2017 y 2019. La muestra de 78 pacientes se distribuyó en hospitalización prolongada (mayor de 3 días) y hospitalización corta (igual o menor a 3 días). Para el análisis bivariado se emplearon las pruebas t de Student y chi cuadrado y para el análisis multivariado se utilizó regresión logística múltiple. Resultados. No existe asociación entre el recuento de leucocitos y la duración de la hospitalización. El análisis multivariado determinó asociación significativa entre la estancia hospitalaria y las siguientes variables: edad (OR 1,051; p=0,027), tiempo quirúrgico (OR 1,028; p=0,013), diagnóstico quirúrgico de apendicitis complicada (OR 15,008; p=0,018), y sexo femenino (OR 6,079; p=0,010). Conclusión. Los factores asociados a la duración de la hospitalización posterior a apendicectomía laparoscópica en este grupo de pacientes fueron la edad, el tiempo quirúrgico, el diagnóstico quirúrgico de apendicitis complicada y el sexo femenino.

Purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop for closing of the appendiceal stump is an alternative for endostapler in selected cases: A propensity score-matched study

INTRODUCTION

The closure of the appendiceal stump is a crucial part of a laparoscopic appendectomy, and an endoloop or endostapler is generally used. The endoloop can be more cost effective than the endostapler. However, reports have shown that the endoloop has a higher postoperative abdominal abscess rate than the endostapler in complicated appendicitis. At our institution, we perform a purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop to reduce postoperative abdominal abscess risk. This study aimed to clarify whether this method could reduce the incidence of postoperative abdominal abscess compared with the endostapler.

METHODS

Patients with acute appendicitis were classified into the purse-string suture group (n = 149) and the endostapler group (n = 82). Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching (n = 47).

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the patient characteristics and postoperative complications, including abdominal abscess. However, the purse-string suture group had more drain placement and a shorter hospital stay than the endostapler group (P = .04 and P = .02, respectively). In patients with complicated appendicitis, there was less drain placement and a shorter hospital stay in the purse-string suture group than in the endostapler group (P < .01 and P < .01, respectively). This might have reflected the difficulty of the operation. All postoperative abdominal abscesses occurred in complicated appendicitis cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoloop with additional purse-string suture had a lower incidence of abscess than previous reports of using endoloop alone. Moreover, the postoperative abdominal abscess rate is similar between the two closure methods.

Endoloops in laparoscopic appendicectomy: A retrospective, cost effectiveness analysis

Background

Over 50,000 appendicectomies are performed in the UK annually. Despite this highvolume. status, and the endoloop being commonly employed, there is a scarcity of literature studying differences in outcomes depending on numbers used.The aim of this study was to investigate whether a significant difference in complication rate exists where different numbers of endoloop ligatures have been applied to the appendiceal base during laparoscopic appendicectomy, and to analyse for potential cost saving.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of appendicectomies at our centre in one year, providing a sample of 254 patients. Each was followed up for complications in the 30 days post discharge and graded using the Clavien-Dindo system. Our null hypothesis of no difference in complication rate was tested using Fisher's exact test.

Results

Of 254 patients, 59 were excluded due to open approach, non-endoloop method, or lack of available record, leaving a population of 195. The result of the two-tailed P value equalled 1.000, indicating no statistically significant difference in complication rate whether one or two endoloops were used. An endoloop costs £13.59. If the 62 cases in which 2 endoloops were used to secure the base had utilised a single endoloop, this would amount to a saving of £842.58.

Conclusion

Our study set out to assess whether the complication rate differs in cases where one or two endoloops have been applied. Retrospective statistical analysis found no significant difference between groups. Therefore, we recommend use of one endoloop to secure the base in laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Factors affecting the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy: A single center study

AIM

This study aimed to explore factors may affect the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

The data of 636 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between July 2016 and July 2019 in Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into group A (hospital stay ≤3 days, 348 patients) and group B (hospital stay >3 days, 288 patients) according to their hospital stay.Sex, age, disease onset time(time from onset to admission), nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, peritonitis, comorbidities, and history of appendicitis; preoperative body temperature (T), white blood cell (WBC) count, percentage of neutrophilic granulocytes, and preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) level; time from diagnosis to surgery. appendix diameter, appendicolith, and ascites in ultrasound or CT; surgical time(the surgery start time was the time of skin incision, and the end time was the time the anesthesia intubation was removed), intraoperative blood loss (the volume of blood infiltrating into a gauze was calculated by weighing the gauze infiltrated with water and calculating the volume of water), intraoperative adhesions or effusions, and stump closure methods, convert to open appendectomy, appendix pathology(perforated or gangrenous appendicitis were defined as complicated appendicitis and simple or suppurative appendicitis were defined as uncomplicated appendicitis) and antibiotic treatment schemes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were detected between group A and group B in age (37.10 ± 13.52y vs 42.94 ± 15.57y, P<0.01), disease onset time (21.36 ± 16.56 h vs 32.52 ± 27.99 h, P <0.01), time from diagnosis to surgery (8.63 ± 7.29 h vs 10.70 ± 8.47 h, P<0.01); surgical time(64.09 ± 17.24 min vs 86.19 ± 39.96 min, P < 0.01); peritonitis(52.9% vs 74%, P < 0.01), comorbidities (12.4% vs 20.5%, P < 0.01), appendicolith (27.6% vs 41.7%, P < 0.01), ascites before the surgery(13.8% vs 22.9%, P < 0.01), intraoperative adhesions or effusions(56% vs 80.2%, P < 0.01); preoperative temperature (37.11 ± 0.64°C vs 37.54 ± 0.90°C, P < 0.01); preoperative WBC count (13.06 ± 3.39 × 109/L vs 14.21 ± 4.54 × 109/L, P = 0.04);preoperative CRP level(18.99 ± 31.72 mg/L vs 32.46 ± 46.68 mg/L, P < 0.01); appendix diameter(10.22 ± 2.59 mm vs 11.26 ± 3.23 mm, P < 0.01); intraoperative blood loss (9.36 ± 7.29 mL vs 13.74 ± 13.49 mL, P < 0.01); using Hem-o-lok for stump closure(30.7% vs 38.5%, P = 0.04); complicated appendicitis (9.5% vs 45.8%, P < 0.01); and using ertapenem for antibiotic treatment after the surgery(4.3% vs 21.5%, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age (OR = 1.021; 95%CI = 1.007-1.036), peritonitis (OR = 1.603; 95% CI = 1.062-2.419), preoperative WBC count (OR = 1.084; 95% CI = 1.025-1.046), preoperative CRP level (OR = 1.010; 95% CI = 1.005-1.015), time from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.043; 95% CI = 1.015-1.072), appendicolith (OR = 1.852; 95% CI = 1.222-2.807), complicated appendicitis (OR = 3.536; 95% CI = 2.132-5.863), surgical time (OR = 1.025; 95% CI = 1.016-1.034), use of Hem-o-lok for stump closure (OR = 1.894; 95% CI = 1.257-2.852), and use of ertapenem for antibiotic treatment (OR = 3.076; 95% CI = 1.483-6.378) were the risk factors for a prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient with appendicitis was older and had peritonitis, higher preoperative WBC count or CRP level, longer time from diagnosis to surgery, appendicolith, and complicated appendicitis, predicting a prolonged hospital stay. Shorter surgical time and the use of silk ligation for stump closure and cephalosporins + metronidazole for antibiotic treatment might be better choices to obtain a shorter hospital stay.

Comparison of stump closure techniques during laparoscopic appendectomies for complicated appendicitis - results from Pol-LA (Polish laparoscopic appendectomy) multicenter large cohort study

Background: In general, the three main options for stump closure in laparoscopic appendectomy are clips, endoscopic staplers and endoloops. However, there is no gold standard, especially regarding complicated acute appendicitis which is generally associated with worse outcomes.Objectives: We aimed to assess the outcomes of different stump closure techniques during laparoscopic appendectomies for complicated appendicitisMethods: Our multicenter observational study of 18 surgical units assessed the outcomes of 1269 laparoscopic appendectomies for complicated appendicitis that used the three main stump closure techniques: clips, staplers and endoloops. Groups were compared in terms of peri- and postoperative outcomes.Results: Staplers were superior in terms of overall morbidity (9.79 vs. 3.29% vs. 7.41%, p = .017) and length of stay (4 vs. 3 vs. 4 days, p < .001) respectively for clips, staplers and endoloops. However, no differences in major complication rates, postoperative intraabdominal abscess formation, reintervention rates and readmission rates were found.Conclusion: Although our results show some clinical benefits of staplers for appendix stump closure, they are based on a non-randomized group of patients and are therefore prone to selection bias. Further well-designed trials taking into consideration not only the clinical benefits, but also, the economic aspects of the surgical treatment of complicated acute appendicitis are needed to confirm our results.

Sutureless Appendectomy by Using Harmonic Scalpel: Is It Possible?

Introduction: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a commonly performed procedure. The base of appendix is secured by various techniques (suture, LigaSure, endoloop, or hamlock clip). Harmonic scalpel (HS) may be used to seal the base of the appendix. The study was conducted to assess the efficacy of HS in laparoscopic appendectomy for sealing the base of the appendix. Materials and Methods: The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 in which base was secured by endoloop and group 2 in which base of the appendix was sealed by HS in a stepwise manner. We made a record of patients' age and gender, and operative time. The patients were followed for a period of 3 months from the time of discharge. Results: During the study period of 4.5 years, 102 patients were in group 1 and 108 patients in group 2. Both groups were age and gender matched. Mean operating time for group 1 was 43.34 ± 6.7 minutes and that for group 2 was 28.46 ± 7.19 minutes (P < .0001). Complications included postoperative ileus (group 1 = 8, group 2 = 10) and surgical site infection (group 1 = 4, group 2 = 4, P > .05). Conclusion: It appears that use of HS for laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible and safe. Its results appear to be comparable with other methods of laparoscopic appendectomy. Complications are minimal. Further studies at other centers may substantiate our efforts.

Are endoscopic loop ties safe even in complicated acute appendicitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is amongst the most common general surgical procedures and the laparoscopic approach is recognized and recommended by international guidelines as a valid option. The different closure techniques of the appendicular stump constitute a matter of debate since their possible implication in determining postoperative infectious complications. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to compare endostapler versus endoscopic loop ties for stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

This is a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized trials and cohort studies comparing endostapler with endoscopic loop ties for the closure of appendicular sump in laparoscopy appendectomy. Subgroup analysis of pediatric patients and patients with complicated appendicitis were performed when data were available. Complicated acute appendicitis was defined as in case of gangrenous/necrotic appendix or perforated appendix. Main outcomes were wound infection rate, intra-abdominal infection rate, length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates.

RESULTS

a total of 5934 patients from 14 studies were included in the analysis. Endostapler was associated with a similar intra-abdominal abscess rate (RR 0.88, 95%C.I. 0.54-1.43) but a lower incidence of wound infection (RR 0.54, 95%C.I. 0.22-0.97) Length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates were similar. In subgroups analysis endostapler reduces significantly the wound infection rate in pediatric patients; no differences in main outcomes were observed in patients with complicated acute appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

In complicated acute appendicitis the stump closure technique did not affect outcomes; the use of endostapler seems to be associated to a reduction of wound infection rate in pediatric patients with non-complicated acute appendicitis.

Intended cost reduction in laparoscopic appendectomy by introducing the endoloop: a single center experience

BACKGROUND

Cost reduction measures in medicine are gaining greater importance nowadays, especially in high-volume procedures such as laparoscopic appendectomy (LAE). Currently there are two common methods of dissecting the appendix from the caecal pole: linear stapler and endoloops. The endoloop is the cheaper device but can only be used in uncomplicated cases of appendicitis. Therefore both methods are used in LAE depending on intraoperative findings. The goal of this study was to retrospectively evaluate possible cost reduction due to increased use of endoloop in LAE in our general surgery department of a tertiary referral university hospital.

METHODS

We previously used the stapler for appendix dissection in LAE as our local protocol but introduced the endoloop as standard method in 2015 to reduce intraoperative costs. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LAE between June 2014 and October 2015 in our department. Our purpose is to show the effects on cost reduction during the introductory period adjusting for a potential bias due to the individual learning curve of every surgeon. We estimated costs for LAE by taking into account average device costs and duration of operation (DO) as well as patient outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 177 patients underwent LAE, 73 in 2014 (phase I) and 104 in 2015 (phase II). The median DO was 61 (± 24 SD) min during the entire period, and increased by 14 min from phase I to II (from 51 (±23 SD) min to 65 (±24 SD) min respectively, p < 0.001). The use of endoloops increased from 10% to 55% (p < 0.001). Patients' characteristics and outcomes did not differ significantly. A median saving of 5.9€ per operation was calculated in phase II compared to phase I (p = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

Introducing the endoloop as standard device for LAE leads to a marginal reduction in intraoperative costs without increasing negative outcomes. In our model the cost-reduction achieved by cheaper devices was overcome by increased costs for DO during the initial phase of use of endoloops. A longer follow up might show a more pronounced cost reduction.