Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a single centre experience

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 < 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.

Single-port Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Beyond the Learning Curve: A Retrospective Comparison With Multi-port Laparoscopic Appendectomy

OBJECTIVES

Previous comparisons between single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) and multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy have been conflicting and limited. We compare our single-surgeon, SPLA experience with multi-port cases performed during the same time.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 128 single-surgeon single-port and 941 multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy cases from April 2009 to December 2014 was conducted.

RESULTS

Patient demographics and preoperative laboratory values were comparable. SPLA was associated with shorter operative time (P=0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in length of hospitalization, postoperative pain medication use, cost, postoperative complication rates (ileus, urinary retention, deep space infection), or readmission between the 2 groups. There were no postoperative incisional hernias in the single-port group. The single-port group had more postoperative oxycodone use (P=0.0110).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports recently published metaanalyses that fail to support older studies demonstrating longer operative times, and higher hernia rates with SPLA.

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.

Single-site Nissen fundoplication versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Background:

Advances in minimally invasive surgery have led to the emergence of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS). The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility of SILS Nissen fundoplication and compare its outcomes with traditional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.

Methods:

This is a retrospective study of 33 patients who underwent Nissen fundoplication between January 2009 and September 2010.

Results:

There were 15 SILS and 18 traditional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication procedures performed. The mean operative time was 129 and 182 minutes in the traditional laparoscopic and single-incision groups, respectively (P = .019). There were no conversions in the traditional laparoscopic group, whereas 6 of the 15 patients in the SILS group required conversion by insertion of 2 to 4 additional ports (P = .0004). At short-term follow-up, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. To date, there have been no reoperations.

Conclusions:

SILS Nissen fundoplication is both safe and feasible. Short-term outcomes are comparable with standard laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Challenges related to the single-incision Nissen fundoplication include overcoming the lengthy learning curve and decreasing the need for additional trocars.

Single-incision laparoscopic management of a giant hepatic cyst

Large symptomatic hepatic cysts may warrant surgical management. Traditional multiport laparoscopic technique is typically preferred over open laparotomy, but the use of the single-incision laparoscopic approach for this diagnosis is not well documented. Here, we describe the case of a 68-year-old woman who underwent complete anterior wall fenestration, excision and cauterization of a simple hepatic cyst via a single-incision laparoscopic technique through an incision at the umbilicus. The objective of this case report is to document single-incision laparoscopy as a safe, feasible and cosmetically appealing approach for the management of a large hepatic cyst.

Suprapubic single incision laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

The single incision method through the umbilicus is commonly used for laparoscopic appendectomy. To obtain a better cosmetic outcome and less surgical complexity, we have designed a new single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy technique performed above the pubic symphysis.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and January 2012, patients with uncomplicated acute or chronic appendicitis, excluding those with abscess, perforation, peritonitis, and previous pelvic surgery, underwent this innovative laparoscopic appendectomy. During each operation, a multichannel trocar composed of a small wound protector and a size 6 sterile glove was deployed after a 2 cm transverse incision was made 1-2 cm above the pubic hair area.

RESULTS

Of the 42 patients, 24 were male and 18 were female. Their mean age was 30 ± 11 y. The mean operative time was 58 ± 11 min, mean time to first flatus postoperatively was 17 ± 8 h, and mean postoperative length of hospital stay was 3 ± 1 d. No complications occurred during surgery. No patient required conversion to either multiport or open appendectomy. Postoperative wound inflammation was observed in one case (2.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggested that suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be safe and feasible for selected patients, in consideration of cosmetic outcomes.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy (3-port LA) for appendectomy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Springer link, and the Cochrane library databases up to April, 2014, for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were pooled by weighted mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

We found 11 RCTs, with a collective total of 731 patients treated with SILA and 725 patients treated with 3-point LA. Results indicated no significant differences between SILA and 3-port LA in primary outcomes, including wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, and total postoperative complications, and some secondary outcomes, including postoperative pain scores and length of hospital stay. However, SILA was associated with significantly longer operative times (WMD = 6.78, 95% CI = 3.78-9.79, P < 0.00001) and higher doses of analgesia (WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.45-1.47, P = 0.0002) than the 3-port LA.

CONCLUSION

Although there was no significant difference in the safety of SILA vs. that of 3-port LA, our findings do not support the application of SILA because of its significantly longer operative times and the higher doses of analgesia required compared with those for 3-point LA.

Single-incision laparoscopic splenectomy with conventional instruments: preliminary experience in consecutive patients and comparison to standard multiple-incision laparoscopic splenectomy

AIM

To study the feasibility and efficiency of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic surgery splenectomy (SILS-Sp) using conventional instruments in consecutive patients and to compare outcomes of the procedure with those of standard multiple-incision laparoscopic splenectomy (MLS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to evaluate all SILS-Sp procedures performed by a single surgeon between March 2010 and January 2013. Additionally, patients who underwent MLS by other surgeons in the same surgical group during the same period were evaluated to serve as a control group. Demographic data, operative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients underwent successful SILS-Sp during the study period without conversion to an open procedure or requiring additional ports. The median operative time was 165 minutes. There was 7.7% morbidity and no mortality in the study group. Median length of stay was 8.8 days. Additionally, 12 patients who underwent MLS were evaluated for comparison. No significant differences were identified in the preoperative patient characteristics between the two groups. For MLS, the median operative time was 158 minutes. There was 8.3% morbidity and no mortality in the group. Median length of stay was 8.3 days. SILS-Sp using conventional instruments was associated with reduced postoperative pain scores, but this did not reach statistical significance. The operative time, conversion rate, and length of stay were equivalent. The mortality, morbidity, and cost were also similar in the two groups. The umbilical incision of the single-incision group can be easily hidden in the umbilical fold with ideal cosmetic result.

CONCLUSIONS

SILS-Sp is feasible and efficient in an unselected patient population in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The single-incision technique is comparable to standard laparoscopic splenectomy in terms of operative time and perioperative outcomes. Ideal cosmetic effect may be its potential advantage.

Current concepts of laparoscopic splenectomy in elective patients

Formerly, open splenectomy represented the conventional surgical treatment for many hematologic diseases. Currently, thanks to permanent technical development and improved skills, also laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has become a recognized procedure in the treatment of spleen diseases, even in case of splenomegaly. A systematic review was performed with the aim of recalling the proved concepts of this surgical treatment and to browse new devices and techniques and their impact on the surgical outcome. The literature search was initially conducted in PubMed by entering general queries related to LS. The record identified through PubMed searching (n = 1599) was then screened by applying several criteria (study published in English from 1991 to 2013 with abstract available, by excluding systematic/non-systematic reviews, meta-analysis, practice guidelines, case reports, and study involving animals). The articles assessed for eligibility (n = 160) were primarily evaluated by excluding studies that did not report operative time and conversion to open surgery. For articles that treated multiport LS we included only clinical trials with patients > 20. The studies included in qualitative synthesis were 23. The search strategy carried out in PubMed does not allow to obtain an overview of the items returned by the main queries. With this aim we replicated the search in the Web of Science^TM database, only including the studies published in English in the period 1991-2013 with no other filter/selection criteria. The full records (n = 1141) and cited references returned by Web of Science^TM were analyzed with the visualization of similarities (VOS) mapping technique. Maps of title/abstract text corpus and bibliographic coupling of authors obtained by applying the VOS approach were presented. If in normal-size or moderately enlarged spleens the laparoscopic approach is unquestionable, in massive splenomegaly the optimal technique remain to be determined. In this setting, prospective randomized trials to compare open vs LS are needed. Between the new techniques of LS the robotic single port splenectomy has the ability to join all the positive aspects of both techniques. Data about this topic are too initial and need to be confirmed with further studies.

Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy and total intracorporeal reconstruction of the digestive tract in the treatment of benign peptic ulcers

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is being applied increasingly in many surgical specialties. However, few reports are available regarding its use in the treatment of benign peptic ulcer disease.

METHODS

We report here on nine patients with gastric or duodenal ulcers who underwent transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (SILSG) between November 2010 and June 2013. All procedures were performed with conventional laparoscopic instruments placed through a single operating portal of entry created within the umbilicus. Total intracorporeal gastrojejunostomy or gastroduodenostomy was then performed for reconstruction of the digestive tract.

RESULTS

Only one case required conversion from single-incision to multiple-incision surgery. Among the eight patients who successfully underwent SILSG, total intracorporeal gastroduodenostomy was performed in two and gastrojejunostomy in six. The mean operation time was 290 ± 50 min (range 230-360 min), and blood loss was 200 ± 66 mL (range 100-300 mL). The patients recovered fully, and the single umbilical scars healed well.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe this is the first report of SILSG with total intracorporeal gastrojejunostomy or gastroduodenostomy in the treatment of benign peptic ulcers. On the basis of this initial experience, SILSG for this indication in the hands of experienced surgeons appears to be feasible and safe.

Feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic splenectomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of single-incision laparoscopic splenectomy (SILS-Sp).

METHODS

We conducted a systemic review of literature between 2009 and 2012 to retrieve all relevant articles.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies with 105 patients undergoing SILS-Sp were reviewed. Fifteen studies used a commercially available single-port device. The range of body mass index was 14.7-41.4 kg/m(2). Six studies described combined operations including cholecystectomy (n = 8), mesh-pexy (n = 1), and pericardial devascularizaion (n = 1). The ranges of operative times and estimated blood losses were 28-420 min and 0-350 mL, respectively. Of 105 patients, three patients (2.9%) required additional ports, two patients (1.9%) were converted to open, and three patients (2.9%) to conventional multiport laparoscopic splenectomy (overall conversion rate, 4.8%). Postoperative bleeding occurred in two patients (1.9%) who both required reoperation. Overall mortality was 0% (0/105). The length of postoperative stay varied across reports (1-11 d). Among four comparative studies, one showed greater estimated blood loss and lower numeric pain rating scale score in the SILS-Sp group than in the multiport laparoscopic splenectomy group (206.25 ± 142.45 versus 111.11 ± 99.58 mL) and (3.81 ± 0.91 versus 4.56 ± 1.29), respectively. Another comparative study showed that SILS-Sp was associated with a shorter operative time (92.5 versus 172 min; P = 0.003), lower conversion rate, equivalent length of hospital stay, reduced mortality, similar morbidity, and comparable postoperative narcotic requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

In early series of highly selected patients, SILS-Sp appears to be feasible and safe when performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. However, as an emerging operation, publication bias is a factor that should be considered before we can draw an objective conclusion.

Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Evidence in the literature regarding the potential of single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) inguinal herniorrhaphy currently is limited. A retrospective comparison of SILS and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) inguinal hernia repair was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive laparoscopic technique.

METHODS

All laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 4 years were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and hernia location (uni- or bilateral), in addition to bivariate and multivariate analyses of surgical technique and outcomes including operative times, conversions, and complications.

RESULTS

The study compared 129 patients who underwent SILS inguinal hernia repair and 76 patients who underwent MP inguinal hernia repair. The cases included 190 men (92.68 %) with a mean age of 55.36 ± 18.01 years (range, 8-86 years) and a mean BMI of 26.49 ± 4.33 kg/m(2) (range, 17.3-41.7 kg/m(2)). These variables did not differ significantly between the SILS and MP cohorts. The average operative times for the SILS and MP unilateral cases were respectively 57.51 and 66.96 min. For the bilateral cases, the average operative times were 81.07 min for SILS and 81.38 min for MP. A multivariate analysis using surgical approach, BMI, case complexity, and laterality as the covariates demonstrated noninferiority of the SILS technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.031). No conversions from SILS to MP occurred, and the rates of conversion to open procedure did not differ significantly between the cohorts (p = 1.00, Fisher's exact test), nor did the complication rates (p = 0.65, χ (2)).

CONCLUSIONS

As shown by the findings, SILS inguinal herniorrhaphy is a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP inguinal hernia repair and can be performed successfully with similar operative times, conversion rates, and complication rates. Prospective trials are essential to confirm equivalence in these areas and to detect differences in patient-centered outcomes.

Reduced port surgery for appendectomy: Early experience and surgical technique

AIM: To evaluate our experience and surgical technique of laparoscopic appendectomy via reduced port surgery (LARPS).

METHODS: Sixteen patients (8 men and 8 women; median age: 31.0 years) who underwent LARPS between November 2009 and May 2012 were included in the present study. We performed LARPS, in which access devices were inserted through an umbilical skin incision with 1 additional skin incision in the left lower abdomen. After setting access devices, pneumoperitoneum was maintained at 10 mmHg using CO₂ and a 3 mm trocar was positioned (or direct puncture was performed by the Endo Relief system) under laparoscopic guidance. The mesoappendix was dissected using an ultrasonically activated device. After mesoappendix dissection, ligation was performed near the appendix base and the appendix was dissected using an ultrasonically activated device. The appendix was then removed. At the end of surgery, we administered local anesthesia with ropivacaine 1% (10 mL) for the skin incisions. The outcomes were evaluated in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of postoperative hospital stay and surgical complications.

RESULTS: Our surgical procedure allowed operators to use instruments as in conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. The basic principle of triangulation of instrumentation was maintained to some degree. LARPS was performed in 9 patients with catarrhal appendicitis, 5 with phlegmonous appendicitis, and 2 with gangrenous appendicitis. The median surgery time was 60 min and the median intraoperative blood loss was 1.2 mL. The median length of postoperative hospitalization was 4 d. There were no conversions to open surgery, no operation-related complications or mortality.

CONCLUSION: Our experience and surgical technique suggest that LARPS is a safe and feasible procedure for patients with appendicitis.

Safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies: A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare single incision laparoscopic surgery for an appendectomy (SILS-A) with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA) when implemented by experienced surgeons.

METHODS: Studies and relevant literature regarding the performance of single-incision laparoscopic surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery for appendectomy were searched for in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and World Health Organization international trial register. The operation time (OR time), complications, wound infection and postoperative day using SILS-A or C-LA were pooled and compared using a meta-analysis. The risk ratios and mean differences were calculated with 95%CIs to evaluate the effect of SILS-A.

RESULTS: Sixteen recent studies including 1624 patients were included in this meta-analysis. These studies demonstrated that, compared with C-LA, SILS-A has a similar OR time in adults but needs a longer OR time in children. SILS-A has similar complications, wound infection and length of the postoperative day in adults and children, and required similar doses of narcotics in children, the pooled mean different of -0.14 [95%CI: -2.73-(-2.45), P > 0.05], the pooled mean different of 11.47 (95%CI: 10.84-12.09, P < 0.001), a pooled RR of 1.15 (95%CI: 0.72-1.83, P > 0.05), a pooled RR of 1.9 (95%CI: 0.92-3.91, P > 0.05), a pooled RR of 1.01 (95%CI: 0.51-2.0, P > 0.05) a pooled RR of 1.86 (95%CI: 0.77-4.48, P > 0.05), the pooled mean different of -0.25 (95%CI: -0.50-0, P = 0.05) the pooled mean different of -0.01 (95%CI: -0.05-0.04, P > 0.05) the pooled mean different of -0.13 (95%CI: -0.49-0.23, P > 0.05) respectively.

CONCLUSION: SILS-A is a technically feasible and reliable approach with short-term results similar to those obtained with the C-LA procedure.

Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy (SILA) and three-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy (TILA) in the treatment of appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies published since 1992 that compared SILA versus TILA in laparoscopic appendicectomy were collected. Data on operative parameters, postoperative recovery, postoperative pain and complications, and hospitalization costs for SILA and TILA were meta-analyzed using fixed-effect and random-effect models.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 16 retrospective studies) that included 1809 patients were studied. Of these patients, 793 and 1016 had undergone SILA and TILA, respectively. There was significantly shorter length of hospital stay; however, there were evidently higher conversion rate, and perhaps higher surgical difficulty and hospitalization costs for SILA compared with TILA. Other outcome variables such as operative time, blood loss, time to first oral intake, postoperative pain and complications were not found to be statistically significant for either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with TILA, SILA has the advantage of shorter hospital stay, and it can achieve comparable operative time, blood loss, postoperative recovery, postoperative pain and complications with TILA. The drawback is that SILA is associated with higher conversion rate, and perhaps higher surgical difficulty and hospitalization costs. Whether it can achieve improvement in cosmesis remains to be confirmed.

Short-term outcome of single-incision laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal inguinal hernia repair

We performed single-incision laparoscopic surgery for totally extra-peritoneal (SILS-TEP) repair using a lightweight mesh fixed by absorbable tacks and without balloon dilation. Thirty-four patients (mean age, 66.5 years) underwent SILS-TEP repair in our hospital between September 2011 and April 2012; 30 patients had unilateral hernia and 4 had bilateral hernias. Mean operative time was 85.6 min for unilateral hernia and 137.7 min for bilateral hernias. All patients underwent successful SILS-TEP repair. Mean hospital stay was 3.4 days. Mean duration of follow-up was 7.1 months. Four seromas were observed, but no recurrences or major complications occurred. SILS-TEP is an economical and useful method for decreasing postoperative complications, such as neuralgia and recurrence, and it could be an attractive approach for inguinal hernia.

Meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional multiport laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus that single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILS-A) is on a par with conventional multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (CMLA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of SILS-A when compared with CMLA.

METHODS

A literature search for studies comparing SILS-A and CMLA was performed. Studies were reviewed for the outcome of interest: patient characteristics, operative outcome, postoperative recovery, postoperative morbidity, patient satisfaction, and cosmetic results.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies comparing SILS-A and CMLA were reviewed: two prospective randomized trials, four prospective studies, and seven retrospective studies. Overall, 893 patients were operated on: by SILS-A in 402 cases (45.0%) versus 491 cases (55.0%) by CMLA. Patients in the SILS-A group were significantly younger than those in the CMLA group (31.2 versus 33.5 y). No other differences were found. Patient satisfaction score was impossible to meta-analyze.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendectomy via SILS-A may be considered as an alternative to CMLA. However, these results must be approached with caution as they are based on data from nonrandomized observational studies. The feasibility and safety of SILS-A must be mainly assessed for difficult clinical situations such as severe obesity, localized abscess, or diffuse peritonitis from a ruptured appendix in the setting of new prospective randomized trials.

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis

Purpose

For the treatment of acute appendicitis, a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been widely performed. Recently, the use of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is increasing because it is believed to have advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we compared SILS and a conventional LA.

Methods

We analyzed the 217 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted appendectomies between August 2010 and April 2012 at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital. One hundred-twelve patients underwent SILS, and 105 patients underwent LA. For the two groups, we compared the operation times, postoperative laboratory results, postoperative pain, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

Results

The patients' demographics, including body mass index, were not significantly different between the two groups. There were 6 perforated appendicitis cases in the SILS group and 5 cases in the LA group. The mean operative time in the SILS group was 65.88 ± 22.74 minutes whereas that in the LA group was 61.70 ± 22.27 minutes (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in the mean hospital stays, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and wound infections between the two groups.

Conclusion

Postoperative pain, complications and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between the SILS and the LA groups. However, our SILS method uses a single trocar and two latex tubes, so cost savings and reduced interference during surgery are expected.