Laparoscopic procedure for suspected appendicitis. A prospective study in 283 consecutive patients

Atypical appendicitis: the impact of CT and its management

Acute appendicitis is a diagnosis that can be made on clinical symptoms and signs but can often be extremely challenging. Difficulties arise particularly when the presentation is atypical, and this can lead to untoward sequelae. In this review, we present the range of presentations of atypical appendicitis, the variety of management options and the potential value of CT.

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.

Results of laparoscopic vs. conventional appendectomy in complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Although many trials show some advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, the value of laparoscopic appendectomy is still controversial. Specifically the question of whether there are benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy in complicated appendicitis remains to be answered.

METHODS

Of 1,106 consecutive appendectomies (717 laparoscopic appendectomies, 330 open appendectomies, and 59 conversions) between 1989 and 1999, the results of 299 patients with complicated appendicitis (defined by perforation, abscess, or peritonitis) were analyzed retrospectively to compare the complications of laparoscopic appendectomy and conversion (intention-to-treat group) with those of open appendectomy.

RESULTS

Complicated appendicitis (n = 299) was treated by laparoscopic appendectomy in 171 patients, by open appendectomy in 82 patients, and by conversion in 46 patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy and conversion showed fewer abdominal wall complications than open appendectomy (13/217; 6 percent vs. 15/82; 18.3 percent; P < 0.003), which led to a decrease of the total complication rate in the intention-to-treat group (21/217; 9.7 percent vs. 19/82; 23.1 percent; P = 0.004). The rate of intra-abdominal abscess formation was nearly the same after laparoscopic appendectomy (4.1 percent) and open appendectomy (4.9 percent). The total complication rate was higher in complicated appendicitis than in acute appendicitis (P < 0.005) but was independent of the laparoscopic technique. The conversion rate was higher in complicated appendicitis than in acute appendicitis (21.2 vs. 2.3 percent; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In comparison with open appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy (by itself and in an intention-to-treat view) leads to a significant reduction of early postoperative complications in complicated appendicitis and therefore should be considered as the procedure of choice.

[Laparoscopic appendectomy in the adult]

AIM OF THE STUDY

The benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy remain controversial. The aim of the study was to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of this technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four hundred and forty-eight patients operated on for suspected appendicitis during a 5-year period were analysed in a retrospective study. The preoperative diagnosis was corrected in 21.4% of the cases (8.1% for males and 28.7% for females) and the conversion rate was 9.7%. There were 17 patients with generalized peritonitis and 28 with localized peritonitis. During the past year, this surgical method was introduced in another hospital and a prospective study included 92 consecutive patients operated on for appendicitis. The operating time was 53 minutes and the conversion rate was 7.6%. There were five patients with generalized peritonitis and eight with localized peritonitis.

RESULTS

There were no postoperative deaths. In the first period, the morbidity rate was 2.3% in the laparoscopic group without conversion. After pathological examination, there was a 14.2% rate of normal appendix. The mean hospital stay was 4.3 days. In the second period, there were only three minor complications and the mean hospital stay was 4.19 days.

CONCLUSION

The choice of laparoscopic approach is associated with some advantages: corrections of the diagnosis (mainly in young women) and simplification of the postoperative course, provided that the surgeon has sufficient experience.

The role of minimal access surgery in the acute abdomen

The improvement in surgical decision-making for patients with abdominal pain but an uncertain diagnosis using DL has now been shown to decrease both negative and nontherapeutic laparotomy rates. Once the diagnosis is established, DL can be taken a step further in many cases, as therapeutic intervention via laparoscopy is possible for a number of these conditions without resorting to a laparotomy. Conditions amenable to therapeutic laparoscopy include appendicitis, perforated peptic ulcer, diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, acute cholecystitis, diaphragmatic rupture, and splenic or hepatic injuries, to name but a few. However, a number of unanswered questions remain such as: Who should perform emergency laparoscopic procedures? What should the selection criteria be? What are the cost implications? and Is patient outcome actually better with laparoscopy? Only randomized controlled trials can answer these questions. Until such data are available, it is important that common sense prevail. Laparoscopy should be incorporated into the general surgeon's armamentarium for the management of patients with abdominal pain as just another tool to be used selectively when indicated. It is also important that new technologies be carefully evaluated in an unbiased manner under strict protocol so that objective data can be obtained which can be used to devise guidelines for safe and effective use of new devices.

Traumatic and nontraumatic perforation of hollow viscera

Hollow viscus injuries are usually managed with few complications. However, if their diagnosis is delayed, or if reparative suture closure should fail, the patient is placed at risk of multiple organ failure. This article presents diagnostic approaches, emphasizing imaging modalities, and therapeutic strategies for three clinical scenarios of hollow viscus perforation: 1) acute appendicitis, 2) gastroduodenal peptic ulcer disease, and 3) trauma.

A clinical outcome and cost analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy are controversial, and the results of recent clinical studies have contradictory conclusions. We performed a cost analysis comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomies to assess potential efficacy of the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

All patients operated on for suspected acute appendicitis at the University of Washington Medical Center (UWMC) from January 1, 1991 through January 1, 1995 were analyzed. Potential benefits of the laparoscopic approach were examined in five major categories: hospital length of stay, total hospital charges, operative time, operating room charges, and postoperative complications. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of perforation for outcome analysis.

RESULTS

There were 163 appendectomies performed in 82 men and 81 women. Twenty-seven (17%) patients had laparoscopic evaluation, of which 21 underwent attempted laparoscopic appendectomy. Among nonperforated patients, laparoscopic appendectomy did not reduce hospital stay compared with open appendectomy, but did lead to greater hospital charges ($7760 vs $5064; P < 0.001). Operating times were longer in the laparoscopic group (104 vs 74 minutes; P < 0.001) compared with open appendectomies. Operating room charges for laparoscopic appendectomies exceeded charges for the open approach ($4740 vs $1870; P < 0.001). Complication rates were similar (laparoscopic, 19% vs open, 16%; NS). The false diagnostic rate for women was four times greater than for men among patients undergoing open appendectomy (31% vs 8%; P < 0.01). Patients with perforation undergoing a midline incision had a longer hospital stay (9.5 vs 5.9; P < 0.02) than patients operated on through a right lower quadrant incision.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis, laparoscopic appendectomy, while safe, was more expensive and was not associated with better clinical outcome compared with open appendectomy patients.