Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis

Establishment of a 24/7 robotic acute care surgery program at a large academic medical center

BACKGROUND

For many years, robotic surgery has been an option for various elective surgical procedures. Though robotic surgery has not traditionally been the first choice for acute surgical patients, recent work has shown promise in broader applications. However, there are limited data regarding how to establish an institutional robotics program for higher acuity patients. This project aimed to map a pathway for the creation of an acute care surgery robotic program at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Various stakeholders were gathered jointly with our surgical faculty: anesthesia, operating room leadership, surgical technologists, circulating nurses, Central Sterile Supply, and Intuitive Surgical Inc. representatives. Staff underwent robotics training, and surgical technologists were trained as bedside first assistants. Nontraditional robotic operating rooms were allocated for coordinated placement of appropriate cases, and pre-made case carts were arranged with staff to be available at all hours. A workflow was created between surgical faculty and staff to streamline add-on robotic cases to the daily schedule.

RESULTS

Six faculty and two fellows are now credentialed in robotics surgery, and additional surgeons are undergoing training. Numerous staff have completed training to perform operative assistant duties. The operating capacity of robotic acute care surgeries has more than doubled in just one year, from 77 to 172 cases between 2022 and 2023, respectively. Two add-on cases can be accommodated per day. Select patients are being offered robotic surgeries in the acute surgical setting, and ongoing efforts are being made to create guidelines for which patients would best benefit from robotic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Launching a successful robotic surgery program requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary effort to ensure seamless integration into daily operations. Additional assistance from outside technology representatives can help to ensure comfort with procedures. Further studies are needed to determine the acute patient population that may benefit most from robotic surgery.

The utility of intraperitoneal drain placement after laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in postoperative intraperitoneal abscess prevention

BACKGROUND

Perforated appendicitis is associated with postoperative development of intraperitoneal abscess. Intraperitoneal drain placement during appendectomy is thought to reduce the risk of developing postoperative intraperitoneal abscess. The aim of this study was to determine whether intraperitoneal drainage could reduce the incidence of intraperitoneal abscess formation after laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of all patients (aged 7 and above) who were diagnosed with perforated appendicitis and subsequently underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between January 2018 and December 2022 at two government hospitals in the state of Kuwait. Demographic, clinical, and perioperative characteristics were compared between patients who underwent intraoperative intraperitoneal drain placement and those who did not. The primary outcome was the development of postoperative intraperitoneal abscess. Secondary outcomes included overall postoperative complications, superficial surgical site infection (SSI), length of stay (LOS), readmission and postoperative percutaneous drainage.

RESULTS

A total of 511 patients met the inclusion criteria between 2018 and 2022. Of these, 307 (60.1%) underwent intraoperative intraperitoneal drain placement. Patients with and without drains were similar regarding age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (Table 1). The overall rate of postoperative intraperitoneal abscess was 6.1%. Postoperatively, there was no difference in postoperative intraperitoneal abscess formation between patients who underwent intraperitoneal drain placement and those who did not (6.5% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.707). Patients with intraperitoneal drains had a longer LOS (4 [4, 6] vs. 3 [2, 5] days, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the overall complication (18.6% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.065), superficial SSI (2.9% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.791) or readmission rate (4.9% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.835).

CONCLUSIONS

Following laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis, intraperitoneal drain placement appears to confer no additional benefit and may prolong hospital stay.

Two Days Versus Five Days of Postoperative Antibiotics for Complex Appendicitis: Cost Analysis of a Randomized, Noninferiority Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare costs for 2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics within the antibiotics after an aPPendectomy In Complex appendicitis trial.Background:Recent studies suggest that restrictive antibiotic use leads to a significant reduction in hospital stays without compromising patient safety. Its potential effect on societal costs remains underexplored.

METHODS

This was a pragmatic, open-label, multicenter clinical trial powered for noninferiority. Patients with complex appendicitis (age ≥ 8 years) were randomly allocated to 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendectomy. Patient inclusion lasted from June 2017 to June 2021 in 15 Dutch hospitals. The final follow-up was on September 1, 2021. The primary trial endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. In the present study, the main outcome measures were overall societal costs (comprising direct health care costs and costs related to productivity loss) and cost-effectiveness. Direct health care costs were recorded based on data in the electronic patient files, complemented by a telephone follow-up at 90 days. In addition, data on loss of productivity were acquired through the validated Productivity Cost Questionnaire at 4 weeks after surgery. Cost estimates were based on prices for the year 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 1005 patients were evaluated in the "intention-to-treat" analysis: 502 patients were allocated to the 2-day group and 503 to the 5-day group. The mean difference in overall societal costs was - €625 (95% CI: -€ 958 to -€ 278) to the advantage of the 2-day group. This difference was largely explained by reduced hospital stay. Productivity losses were similar between the study groups. Restricting postoperative antibiotics to 2 days was cost-effective, with estimated cost savings of €31,117 per additional infectious complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Two days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis results in a statistically significant and relevant cost reduction, as compared with 5 days. Findings apply to laparoscopic appendectomy in a well-resourced health care setting.

Single versus double Hem-o-lok clips to secure the apendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized multicentric clinical trial

PURPOSE

Polymeric clips (Hem-o-lok ligation system) are now widely used to securing the base of the appendix during laparoscopic appendectomy. Studies comparing the use of single or double hem-o-lok clips are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the reliability of a single hem-o-lok clips with a double hem-o-lok clips for closure of an appendiceal stump.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study includes patients from two centers who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy with the diagnosis of appendicitis between September 2020 and March 2023. Demographic, operative and clinical outcomes of the use of single or double hem-o-lok clips for closure of the appendiceal stump were compared. Factors affecting long postoperative hospital stay were investigated using univariate and multivariate analyzes.

RESULTS

One hundred forty two (48.3%) patients in the single hem-o-lok arm and 152 (51.7%) patients in the double hem-o-lok arm were included in the analysis.The shortest operative time was noted in the single hem-o-lok group (52.1 ± 19.9 versus 61.6 ± 24.9 min, p < 0.001). The median hospital stay was 1 day (range 1-10) in the single hem-o-lok group and 1 day (range 1-12) in the double hem-o-lok group, and was shorter in the single hem-o-lok arm (1.61 ± 1.56 vs 1.84 ± 1.69, p = 0.019). Based on multivariate analysis, drain placement was identified as an independent predictive factor for long hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of single hem-o-lok clips for appendiceal stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and effective. Trial registration NCT04387370 ( http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ).

Colonoscopy-induced acute appendicitis: A case report

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is widely used for examination, diagnosis, and treatment because of its low incidence of associated complications. Post-colonoscopy appendicitis (PCA) is very rare and is easily misdiagnosed as electrocoagulation syndrome or colon perforation. Therefore, clinicians should pay close attention to this complication.

CASE SUMMARY

A 47-year-old female patient underwent a colonoscopy for a systematic physical examination, and the procedure was uneventful with normal endoscopic and histologic findings. However, the bowel preparation was suboptimal (Boston 2-3-2). After the examination, the patient experienced pain in the lower abdomen, which progressively worsened. Computed tomography of the lower abdomen and pelvis revealed appendiceal calcular obstruction and appendicitis. As the patient refused surgery, she was managed with antibiotics and recovered well.

CONCLUSION

In the current literature, the definition of PCA remains unclear. However, abdominal pain after colonoscopy should be differentiated from acute appendicitis.

Awareness of Appendectomy and Its Complications Among Saudis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical causes of acute abdominal pain in adults and children in the emergency department. It is treated by appendectomy by either an open or laparoscopic approach. Although laparoscopic appendectomy has been used for the last 35 years, there are still indications for an open approach in some cases.

OBJECTIVES

 The aim of this study was to explore the awareness of the general population in Saudi Arabia of appendectomy according to the surgical approach.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey using a questionnaire constructed by an expert based on Google Forms (Google, Mountain View, CA) was used from February to March 2022. Variables were demographical data, general knowledge, history of appendectomy, its surgical approach, and postoperative complications, if any.

RESULTS

The study included 162 participants. The awareness level of acute appendicitis was high (72.2%). History of appendectomy was almost 30% and was significantly more common in males than females (p = 0.045). The rate of postoperative complications showed a significant difference between open (4.3%) vs. laparoscopic approaches (8%) (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

 Young, educated Saudis are aware of the importance of surgical intervention for acute appendicitis. However, further hospital-based studies are recommended concerning the role of the surgical approach and its various impacts on postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic versus robotic abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The current evidence is inconclusive on whether robotic or laparoscopic surgery is the optimal platform for minimally invasive surgery. Existing comparisons techniques focus on short-term outcomes only, while potentially being confounded by a lack of standardisation in robotic procedures. There is a pertinent need for an up-to-date comparison between minimally invasive surgical techniques. We aimed to systematically review randomised controlled trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic techniques in major surgery.

METHODS

Embase, Medline and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 13th September 2022. Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic techniques in abdominal and pelvic surgery. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Short-term, health-related quality of life, and long-term, outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies, across thirteen procedures, involving 7364 patients were included. All of the studies reported non-significant differences in mortality between robotic and laparoscopic surgery. In majority of studies, there was no significant difference in complication rate (n = 31/35, 85.6%), length of postoperative stay (n = 27/32, 84.4%), and conversion rate (n = 15/18, 83.3%). Laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter operative time (n = 16/31, 51.6%) and lower total cost (n = 11/13, 84.6%). Twenty three studies reported on quality of life outcomes; majority (n = 14/23, 60.9%) found no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences between robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery with regards to mortality and morbidity outcomes in the majority of studies. Robotic surgery was frequently associated with longer operative times and higher overall cost. Selected studies found potential benefits in post-operative recovery time, and patient-reported outcomes; however, these were not consistent across procedures and trials, with most studies being underpowered to detect differences in secondary outcomes. Future research should focus on assessing quality of life, and long-term outcomes to further elucidate where the robotic platform could lead to patient benefits, as the technology evolves.

Perforated appendicitis treated with laparoscopic appendicectomy or open appendicectomy: A meta-analysis

Aim

This analysis compared the impact of laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) and open appendicectomy (OA) on treating adult perforated appendicitis (PA).

Methods

Articles relating to LA and OA in treating PA were retrieved from databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase since their founding to January 2022. These articles were independently filtered based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two investigators. The quality of these articles was assessed and article data were extracted. Dichotomous data were presented in the form of odd's ratio (OR), whereas continuous data were in the form of weighted mean difference (WMD). The included articles reported at least one of the following outcomes: intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), wound infection, operative time, hospital stay and complications.

Results

Three randomised control trials (198 LA cases vs. 205 OA cases) and 12 case - control trials (914 LA cases vs. 2192 OA cases) were included. This analysis revealed that although the IAA formation rate was similar in the LA and OA groups (OR: 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-1.88), the wound infection rate was lower in the LA group (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.28-0.51). Furthermore, LA was associated with shorter hospital stay (WMD: -1.43 days, 95% CI: -2.33--0.52) and fewer complications than OA (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.57).

Conclusion

LA has significant benefits in treating PA and is associated with better post-operative outcomes such as shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of wound infection and other complications. However, more studies with randomised and large-sample populations are still required to determine the clinical benefit of LA in treating PA.

Therapeutic strategy for acute appendicitis based on laparoscopic surgery

PURPOSE

The treatment strategies for acute appendicitis differ depending on the facility, and various studies have investigated the usefulness of conservative treatment with antibiotics, laparoscopic surgery, and interval appendectomy (IA). However, although laparoscopic surgery is widely used, the clinical strategy for acute appendicitis, especially complicated cases, remains controversial. We assessed a laparoscopic surgery-based treatment strategy for all patients diagnosed with appendicitis, including those with complicated appendicitis (CA).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed patients with acute appendicitis treated in our institution between January 2013 and December 2021. Patients were classified into uncomplicated appendicitis (UA) and CA groups based on computed tomography (CT) findings on the first visit, and the treatment course was subsequently compared.

RESULTS

Of 305 participants, 218 were diagnosed with UA and 87 with CA, with surgery performed in 159 cases. Laparoscopic surgery was attempted in 153 cases and had a completion rate of 94.8% (145/153). All open laparotomy transition cases (n = 8) were emergency CA surgery cases. No significant differences were found in the incidence of postoperative complications in successful emergency laparoscopic surgeries. In univariate and multivariate analyses for the conversion to open laparotomy in CA, only the number of days from onset to surgery ≥ 6 days was an independent risk factor (odds ratio: 11.80; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is preferred in all appendicitis cases, including CA. Since laparoscopic surgery is difficult for CA when several days from the onset have passed, it is necessary that surgeons make an early decision on whether to operate.

Telestration with augmented reality improves surgical performance through gaze guidance

BACKGROUND

In minimally invasive surgery (MIS), trainees need to learn how to interpret the operative field displayed on the laparoscopic screen. Experts currently guide trainees mainly verbally during laparoscopic procedures. A newly developed telestration system with augmented reality (iSurgeon) allows the instructor to display hand gestures in real-time on the laparoscopic screen in augmented reality to provide visual expert guidance (telestration). This study analysed the effect of telestration guided instructions on gaze behaviour during MIS training.

METHODS

In a randomized-controlled crossover study, 40 MIS naive medical students performed 8 laparoscopic tasks with telestration or with verbal instructions only. Pupil Core eye-tracking glasses were used to capture the instructor's and trainees' gazes. Gaze behaviour measures for tasks 1-7 were gaze latency, gaze convergence and collaborative gaze convergence. Performance measures included the number of errors in tasks 1-7 and trainee's ratings in structured and standardized performance scores in task 8 (ex vivo porcine laparoscopic cholecystectomy).

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement 1-7 on gaze latency [F(1,39) = 762.5, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.95], gaze convergence [F(1,39) = 482.8, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.93] and collaborative gaze convergence [F(1,39) = 408.4, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.91] upon instruction with iSurgeon. The number of errors was significantly lower in tasks 1-7 (0.18 ± 0.56 vs. 1.94 ± 1.80, p < 0.01) and the score ratings for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were significantly higher with telestration (global OSATS: 29 ± 2.5 vs. 25 ± 5.5, p < 0.01; task-specific OSATS: 60 ± 3 vs. 50 ± 6, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Telestration with augmented reality successfully improved surgical performance. The trainee's gaze behaviour was improved by reducing the time from instruction to fixation on targets and leading to a higher convergence of the instructor's and the trainee's gazes. Also, the convergence of trainee's gaze and target areas increased with telestration. This confirms augmented reality-based telestration works by means of gaze guidance in MIS and could be used to improve training outcomes.

Diagnostic, Therapy and Complications in Acute Appendicitis of 19,749 Cases Based on Routine Data: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery. The gold standard treatment is surgery. Complications may occur during or after an appendectomy. In addition to age, clinically important factors for the outcome after appendicitis seems to be the comorbidities and the stage of the appendicitis at the time of the operation. Large observational data describing these facts are missing. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter observational study, all inpatients over the age of 17 years with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis in 47 hospitals of the Clinotel Hospital Group between 2010 and 2017 were included. Results: A total of 19,749 patients with acute appendicitis were operated on. The number of patients with more than five secondary diagnoses has increased from 8.4% (2010) to 14.5% (2017). The number of secondary diagnoses correlates with the ages of the patients and leads to a significantly longer hospital stay. Computer tomography (CT) has gained in importance in recent years in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. A total of 19.9% of patients received a CT in 2017. Laparoscopic appendectomy increased from 88% in 2010 to 95% in 2017 (p < 0.001). The conversion rate did not change relevant in the study period (i.e., 2.3% in 2017). Appendicitis with perforation, abscess, or generalized peritonitis was observed in 24.8% of patients. Mortality was 0.6% during the observation period and was associated with age and the number of secondary diagnoses. The analysis is based on administrative data collected primarily for billing purposes, subject to the usual limitations of such data. This includes partially incomplete clinical data. Conclusions: Multimorbidity is increasingly present in patients with acute appendicitis. Mortality is still in an acceptably low range with no increase. A CT scan is necessary for a precise diagnosis in unclear clinical situations to avoid unnecessary operations and was performed more often at the end of the study than at the beginning.

Using Artificial Neural Networks to Predict Intra-Abdominal Abscess Risk Post-Appendectomy

Objective

To determine if artificial neural networks (ANN) could predict the risk of intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) development post-appendectomy.

Background

IAA formation occurs in 13.6% to 14.6% of appendicitis cases with "complicated" appendicitis as the most common cause of IAA. There remains inconsistency in describing the severity of appendicitis with variation in treatment with respect to perforated appendicitis.

Methods

Two "reproducible" ANN with different architectures were developed on demographic, clinical, and surgical information from a retrospective surgical dataset of 1574 patients less than 19 years old classified as either negative (n = 1,328) or positive (n = 246) for IAA post-appendectomy for appendicitis. Of 34 independent variables initially, 12 variables with the highest influence on the outcome selected for the final dataset for ANN model training and testing.

Results

A total of 1574 patients were used for training and test sets (80%/20% split). Model 1 achieved accuracy of 89.84%, sensitivity of 70%, and specificity of 93.61% on the test set. Model 2 achieved accuracy of 84.13%, sensitivity of 81.63%, and specificity of 84.6%.

Conclusions

ANN applied to selected variables can accurately predict patients who will have IAA post-appendectomy. Our reproducible and explainable ANNs potentially represent a state-of-the-art method for optimizing post-appendectomy care.

Three-Port with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction versus Conventional Laparoscopic Anterior Resection for Rectal-Sigmoid Cancer: A Matched Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

The conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery requires four or more ports to accomplish the laparoscopic dissection, and a mini-laparotomy to remove the specimen, which is a main cause of postoperative pain and incision complications, and compromise the cosmetic results. Reduced port surgery and natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery hold the promise to overcome these drawbacks. This study planned to compare peri-operative outcomes of patients with rectal-sigmoid cancer undergoing three-port laparoscopic anterior resection with NOSE (three-port NOSE LAR) to those of patients receiving conventional LAR.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with rectal-sigmoid cancer underwent three-port NOSE LAR between December 2018 and October 2020. For comparison, 50 patients with rectal-sigmoid cancer underwent conventional LAR in the same period were matched. The peri-operative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Operating time of three-port NOSE group was slightly longer than that of conventional group (135 min vs. 121 min, p = .147). The incision length of three-port NOSE group was shorter than that of conventional group (2.9 cm vs. 7.4 cm, p = .000). Complication rates in three-port NOSE group and conventional group were similar (12.0% vs. 20.0%, p = .524). The tumor size was smaller in three-port NOSE group than the conventional group (2.1 cm vs. 3.5 cm, p = .000). Pain score was lower in three-port NOSE group than the conventional group at postoperative day 1 (1.6 vs. 3.0, p = 0.045) and day 2 (0.2 vs. 2.1, p = .003). The BIQ score was significantly higher in the three-port NOSE group compared to the conventional group (42.9 ± 3.5 vs. 38.2 ± 2.5, p = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Three-port NOSE LAR for rectal-sigmoid cancer is feasible and provides similar peri-operative outcomes compared to conventional LAR. It reduces postoperative pain and produces better cosmesis.

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.

A randomized clinical trial of technical modifications of appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background

Closure of the appendix stump presents the most critical part of laparoscopic appendectomy. The aim of the present study was to compare the medical outcomes and cost analysis of laparoscopic appendectomy with respect to the different methods of stump closure.

Methods

This was a prospective randomized clinical trial conducted in a single institution (University Hospital Ostrava) within a 2-year study period. All included patients were randomized into one of three trial arms (endoloop, hem-o-lok clips or endostapler).

Results

In total, 180 patients (60 patients in each arm) were enrolled into the study. The mean length of hospital stay (3.6 ± 1.7 days) was comparable in all study arms. The shortest operative time was noted in the hem-o-lok subgroup of patients (37.9 ± 12.5 min). Superficial surgical site infection was detected in 4.4% of study patients; deep surgical site infection was noted in 1.7% of the patients. The frequency of surgical site infections was comparable in all study arms (p = 0.7173). The mean direct costs of laparoscopic appendectomy were significantly the lowest in the hem-o-lok subgroup of patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy is not a profit-making procedure in our institution (mean profit of made from the study patients was—104.3 ± 579.2 Euro). Closure of the appendix stump by means of endostapler presents the most expensive and the highest loss-incurring technique (p = 0.0072).

Conclusions

The present study indicates that all technical modifications of appendix stump closure are comparable with regards to postoperative complications. The stapler technique is significantly the most expensive. We concluded that hem-o-lok clips have the potential for becoming the preferred method of securing the appendix base during laparoscopic appendectomy. Trial registration NCT03750032 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Appendicitis-Like Picture Induced by Foreign Body in a 2-Year-Old Boy

Background and Aim. Appendicitis is unusual in toddlers and foreign body- (FB-) induced appendicitis is rare. We present a FB-induced appendicitis in a toddler with no suggestive history of FB ingestion. Case Presentation. A 2-year-old healthy boy presented to the emergency department with irritability for 3 days duration associated with fever of 39°C, nausea, anorexia, and vomiting. There was no history of foreign body ingestion. The abdomen was distended and diffusely tender. An abdominal ultrasound (US) was suggestive of perforated appendicitis with appendicular mass formation. An abdominal X-ray showed a pin-like foreign body in the abdomen. An emergent appendectomy was performed. Intraoperatively, a sealed small cecal perforation was noticed. A 5 cm pin-like metallic foreign body was found to obstruct the appendicular lumen. The appendix was grossly normal without inflammatory changes. Conclusion. FB-induced perforations or appendicitis albeit in patients with no history of FB ingestion or infants and toddlers need a high clinical suspicion to prevent the delay in diagnosis and the subsequent complications.

Comparison of postoperative complications between open and laparoscopic appendectomy: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been popular for decades because of shorter hospitalization and return to routine activity. However, complications (e.g., surgical site infection [SSI] and intra-abdominal abscess [IAA]) relative to open appendectomy (OA) are still debated. We therefore conducted an umbrella review to systematically appraise meta-analyses (MAs) comparing SSI and IAA between LA and OA.

METHODS

Meta-analyses that included only randomized controlled trials were identified from MEDLINE and Scopus databases from inception until July 2018. Their findings were described, the number of overlapping studies was assessed using corrected covered area, and excess significant tests were also assessed. Finally, effect sizes of SSI and IAA were repooled.

RESULTS

Ten MAs were eligible; SSI was reported in all MAs and IAA in 8 MAs. Surgical site infection rate was 48% to 70% lower in LA than OA, but conversely, IAA rate was 1.34 to 2.20 higher in LA than OA. Overlapping included studies for SSI and IAA were 61% and 54%, respectively, indicating that less information was added across MAs. However, there was no evidence of bias from excess significant tests when pooling SSI or IAA estimates. The risk ratios (95% confidence interval) comparing LA versus OA were repooled in adults and children yielding risk ratios of 0.56 (0.47-0.67) and 0.40 (0.25-0.65) for SSI, and 1.20 (0.88-1.63) and 1.05 (0.61-1.80) for IAA.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from this umbrella review indicates that LA carries a significantly lower risk of SSI but likely a higher risk of IAA than OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review/meta-analysis, level I.

Current Evidence for Minimally Invasive Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Risk Mitigation Strategies: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to review the literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and propose mitigation measures to address these risks.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused surgeons the world over to re-evaluate their approach to surgical procedures given concerns over the risk of aerosolization of viral particles and exposure of operating room staff to infection. International society guidelines advise against the use of laparoscopy; however, the evidence on this topic is scant and recommendations are based on the perceived most cautious course of action.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of the existing literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and balance these risks against the benefits of minimally invasive approaches. We also propose mitigation measures to address these risks that we have adopted in our institution.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

While it is currently assumed that open surgery minimizes operating room staff exposure to the virus, our findings reveal that this may not be the case. A well-informed, evidence-based opinion is critical when making decisions regarding which operative approach to pursue, for the safety and well-being of the patient, the operating room staff, and the healthcare system at large. Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer significant advantages with respect to both patient care, and the mitigation of the risk of viral transmission during surgery, provided the appropriate equipment and expertise are present.

Comparison of laparoscopic and open appendectomy on wound infection and healing in complicated appendicitis

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of laparoscopic and open surgery on the development of postoperative surgical wound infection and wound healing between complicated appendicitis patients. Patients with complicated appendicitis were divided into those underwent laparoscopic and open surgical procedures according to the surgical method. Patients were followed up with regard to development of any postoperative wound infection, and medical, radiological, and surgical treatment methods and results were recorded. A total of 363 patients who underwent appendectomy were examined, of which 103 (28.4%) had complicated appendicitis. Postoperative wound infection rate in patients who underwent open surgery was 15.9%, while it was 6.8% in the laparoscopic surgery group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of infection development rates (P > .05). The rate of surgical drainage use and rehospitalisation was significantly higher in the group with wound infection than in the group without wound infection. (P < .05). We suggest that in terms of wound infection and wound healing, laparoscopic surgery should be the method of choice for patients with complicated appendicitis. In order to reduce the frequency of wound infection, drains should not be kept for a long time in patients undergoing appendectomy.

Postcolonoscopy Appendicitis: A Review of 57 Cases

The purpose of this study is to review the cases of postcolonoscopy appendicitis (PCA) reported in the literature. A comprehensive search using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar identified 57 cases. The median age at presentations of PCA was 55 years. PCAs typically occurred during the first 24 hours after colonoscopy, and the majority developed after diagnostic colonoscopy. Clinical presentations were similar to those with common acute appendicitis, though with a high perforation rate. Most patients were correctly diagnosed using ultrasound or computed tomography scan. Treatment included open appendicectomy, laparoscopic appendicectomy or cecotomy, radiologic drainage of the abscess, nonoperative treatment with antibiotics. In addition to barotrauma, fecalith impaction into the appendiceal lumen, direct trauma to the appendiceal orifice, and underlying ulcerative colitis, a pre-existing subclinical disease of the appendix seems to play an important role in the pathogenesis. For PCA, timely diagnosis and management are crucial to attain a satisfactory outcome.

Feasibility, acceptance, safety, and effectiveness of antibiotic therapy as alternative treatment approach to appendectomy in uncomplicated acute appendicitis

PURPOSE

Based on results from randomized controlled trials, there is an increasing discussion if antibiotic treatment is an equivalent therapeutic approach to appendectomy in uncomplicated acute appendicitis. This observational prospective study evaluates its feasibility, safety, and effectiveness in clinical practice.

METHODS

The study included all consecutive adults treated for acute appendicitis over an 18-month period in one hospital. Patients receiving antibiotics were compared to those treated surgically. Follow-up comprised 1 year. The primary endpoint was treatment success, defined as no secondary appendectomy during follow-up (antibiotic group) or successful appendectomy (primary surgical group). Secondary endpoints were complications, duration of hospital stay, pain intensity, and length of absence from work.

RESULTS

54/124 (43.6%) patients were primarily treated with antibiotics and 70/124 (56.4%) surgically. Treatment success at 1 year was 77.1% (95%-CI 62.8-88%) for antibiotic and 100% for surgical treatment. Complications were non-significantly less frequent both among all patients treated with antibiotics and among patients undergoing secondary appendectomy compared to patients undergoing primary appendectomy (20.8% vs. 27.1% and 9.1% vs. 27.1%). The initial hospital stay was significantly shorter in the antibiotic group (mean 3.6 vs. 4.8 days, median 3 days, p = 0.03). After 1 year, the cumulative hospital stay was not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendectomy remains the most effective treatment for the definitive cure of acute appendicitis. However, antibiotic therapy can be a safe alternative approach for selected patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00010401.

Medical Treatment: An Emerging Standard in Acute Appendicitis?

Appendicectomy has been accepted as the gold standard for the management of appendicitis over the years, but there has been an increasing evidence and trend toward the conservative approach to the management of appendicitis. The aim of this review is to search existing literature and to evaluate and compare the conservative and operative approaches to the management of appendicitis. An electronic search of published literature was conducted through Pubmed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Medline using a variety of search items to find relevant observational studies, randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Bibliographies of selected articles were also analyzed for publications of interest relevant to the scope of the topic. The articles that reported primary outcomes after the management of appendicitis, complications, economic implications, and duration of follow-up were reviewed in detail. The major primary outcomes show a high recurrence rate and failed treatment associated with the conservative management of appendicitis. The other outcomes obtained show that there is an increased incidence of complications associated with operative management. Economic implications and cost-effectiveness analysis show that conservative treatment may be preferred. The length of hospital stay was significantly higher in conservative approach to management; however, shorter time off activities was observed. In general, the conservative management of appendicitis is still regarded as safe, effective, and efficacious, and further research with well-constructed study design, and larger sample size is required.

Cost analysis of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: 5-year results of the APPAC randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been established at long-term follow-up with the majority of recurrences shown to occur within the first year. Overall costs of antibiotics are significantly lower compared with appendectomy at short-term follow-up, but long-term durability of these cost savings is unclear. The study objective was to compare the long-term overall costs of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial at 5 years.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This multicentre, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial randomly assigned 530 adult patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis to appendectomy or antibiotic treatment at six Finnish hospitals. All major costs during the 5-year follow-up were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis. Between November 2009 and June 2012, 273 patients were randomized to appendectomy and 257 to antibiotics. The overall costs of appendectomy were 1.4 times higher (p<0.001) (€5716; 95% CI: €5510 to €5925) compared with antibiotic therapy (€4171; 95% CI: €3879 to €4463) resulting in cost savings of €1545 per patient (95% CI: €1193 to €1899; p<0.001) in the antibiotic group. At 5 years, the majority (61%, n = 156) of antibiotic group patients did not undergo appendectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

At 5-year follow-up antibiotic treatment resulted in significantly lower overall costs compared with appendectomy. As the majority of appendicitis recurrences occur within the first year after the initial antibiotic treatment, these results suggest that treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis with antibiotics instead of appendectomy results in lower overall costs even at longer-term follow-up.

Transumbilical Single-Incision Laparoscopic-Assisted Appendectomy (TULAA) Is Useful in Adults and Young Adolescents: Comparison with Multi-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Background and objectives: Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SLA) in most previous studies has used intracorporeal excision of the appendix and needed a longer operative time than multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy (MLA), although SLA does have the potential benefit of an almost invisible scar within the umbilicus. Some studies have reported that extracorporeal transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (TULAA) in children took a considerably reduced operative time compared to MLA. We adopted TULAA in adults, adding routine dissection of the peritoneal attachment of the appendix. The aim was to compare the operative outcomes between TULAA and MLA. Materials and Methods: Between March 2013 and January 2016, 770 patients with acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis from 15 to 75 years of age were enrolled retrospectively. The operation was performed as early (EA) and interval appendectomy (IA). Results: Operative time was shorter in the TULAA group than in the MLA group, except for IA. No open conversion occurred in the TULAA group, except one case of ileocecal resection for IA. No intra-abdominal fluid collection was found in the TULAA group. Extended resection (especially partial cecectomy) was performed less frequently in the TULAA group than in the MLA group for IA. Mean postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the TULAA group for uncomplicated appendicitis. When the data of the EA group and the IA group were compared, operative time was significantly shorter in the IA group for both MLA and TULAA. The open conversion rate and the complication rate tended to be lower in the IA group. Confined to IA, the TULAA group tended to have shorter mean initial, postoperative, and total hospital stays. Conclusions: TULAA can be a useful surgical alternative to MLA in adults and young adolescents, because it lacks open conversion and provides both a shorter operative time and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. TULAA is feasible for IA in that it showed a lower rate of extended resection and complications.

Educational value of surgical videos on YouTube: quality assessment of laparoscopic appendectomy videos by senior surgeons vs. novice trainees

Background

To prepare for surgery, surgeons often recur to surgical videos, with YouTube being reported as the preferred source. This study aimed to compare the evaluation of three surgical trainees and three senior surgeons of the 25 most viewed laparoscopic appendectomy videos listed on YouTube. Additionally, we assessed the video conformity to the published guidelines on how to report laparoscopic surgery videos (LAP-VEGaS).

Methods

Based on the number of visualization, the 25 most viewed videos on laparoscopic appendectomy uploaded on YouTube between 2010 and 2018 were selected. Videos were evaluated on the surgical technical performance (GOALS score), critical view of safety (CVS), and overall video quality and utility.

Results

Video image quality was poor for nine (36%) videos, good for nine (36%), and in high definition for seven (28%). Educational content (e.g., audio or written commentary) was rarely present. With the exception of the overall level of difficulty, poor consistency was observed for the GOALS domains between senior surgeons and trainees. Fifteen videos (60%) demonstrated a satisfactory CVS score (≥ 5). Concerning the overall video quality, agreement among senior surgeons was higher (Cronbach’s alpha 0.897) than among trainees (Cronbach’s alpha 0.731). The mean overall videos utility (Likert scale, 1 to 5) was 1.92 (SD 0.88) for senior examiners, and 3.24 (SD 1.02) for trainee examiners. The conformity to the LAP-VEGaS guidelines was weak, with a median value of 8.1% (range 5.4–18.9%).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic videos represent a useful and appropriate educational tool but they are not sufficiently reviewed to obtained standard quality. A global effort should be made to improve the educational value of the uploaded surgical videos, starting from the application of the nowadays-available LAP-VEGaS guidelines.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13017-019-0241-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy is superior to open surgery for complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Over the last three decades, laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) has become the routine treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The role of laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis (gangrenous and/or perforated) remains controversial due to concerns of an increased incidence of post-operative intra-abdominal abscesses (IAA) in LA compared to open appendicectomy (OA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of LA versus OA for complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Database for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and case-control studies (CCS) that compared LA with OA for complicated appendicitis.

RESULTS

Data from three RCT and 30 CCS on 6428 patients (OA 3,254, LA 3,174) were analysed. There was no significant difference in the rate of IAA (LA = 6.1% vs. OA = 4.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.71-1.47, p = 0.91). LA for complicated appendicitis has decreased overall post-operative morbidity (LA = 15.5% vs. OA = 22.7%; OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.31-0.59, p < 0.0001), wound infection, (LA = 4.7% vs. OA = 12.8%; OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.19-0.36, p < 0.001), respiratory complications (LA = 1.8% vs. OA = 6.4%; OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.13-0.49, p < 0.001), post-operative ileus/small bowel obstruction (LA = 3.1% vs. OA = 3.6%; OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-1.0, p = 0.048) and mortality rate (LA = 0% vs. OA = 0.4%; OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04-0.61, p = 0.008). LA has a significantly shorter hospital stay (6.4 days vs. 8.9 days, p = 0.02) and earlier resumption of solid food (2.7 days vs. 3.7 days, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

These results clearly demonstrate that LA for complicated appendicitis has the same incidence of IAA but a significantly reduced morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay compared with OA. The finding of complicated appendicitis at laparoscopy is not an indication for conversion to open surgery. LA should be the preferred treatment for patients with complicated appendicitis.

Laparoscopic Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease Has Better Outcomes Than Open Repair

PURPOSE

Over the last 3 decades, laparoscopic procedures have emerged as the standard treatment for many elective and emergency surgical conditions. Despite the increased use of laparoscopic surgery, the role of laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer remains controversial among general surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcer.

METHODS

A systemic literature review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Database of all randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared laparoscopic (LR) with open repair (OR) for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). Data was extracted using a standardised form and subsequently analysed.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis using data from 7 RCT showed that LR for PPU has decreased overall post-operative morbidity (LR = 8.9% vs. OR = 17.0%) (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.79, p < 0.01), wound infections, (LR = 2.2% vs. OR = 6.3%) (OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.5, p < 0.01) and shorter duration of hospital stay (6.6 days vs. 8.2 days, p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in length of operation, leakage rate, incidence of intra-abdominal abscess, post-operative sepsis, respiratory complications, re-operation rate or mortality. There was no publication bias and the quality of the studies ranged from poor to good.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate that laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer has a reduced morbidity and total hospital stay compared with open approach. There are no significant differences in mortality, post-operative sepsis, abscess and re-operation rates. LR should be the preferred treatment option for patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease.

Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Costs Associated with Laparoscopic Appendectomy in a Middle-Income Country with Universal Health Coverage

BACKGROUND

Although many studies have compared outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA), some clinical and economic outcomes continue to be controversial, particularly in low-medium-income countries. We aimed at determining clinical and economic outcomes associated with LA versus OA in adult patients in Colombia.

METHODS

Retrospective, cohort study based on administrative healthcare records included all patients who underwent LA or OA in Colombia's contributory regime between July 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015. Outcomes were 30-day mortality rates, ICU admissions rates, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs provided until discharge. Propensity score matching techniques were used to balance the baseline characteristics of patients (age, sex, comorbidities based on the Charlson index, insurer, and geographic location) and to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of LA as compared to OA over outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 65,625 subjects were included, 92.9% underwent OA and 7.1% LA. For the entire population, 30-day mortality was 0.74 per 100 appendectomies (95% CI 0.67-0.81), the mean and median LOS were 3.83 days and 1 day, respectively, and the ICU admissions rate during the first 30 days was 7.92% (95% CI 7.71-8.12). The ATE shows an absolute difference in the mortality rate after 30 days of -0.35 per 100 appendectomies (p = 0.023), in favor of LA. No effects on ICU admissions or LOS were identified. LA was found to increase costs by 514.13 USD on average, with total costs of 772.78 USD for OA and 1286.91 USD for LA (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia's contributory regime, LA is associated with lower 30-day mortality rate and higher hospital costs as compared to OA. No differences are found in ICU admissions or LOS.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The removal of the acute appendix is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures. Open surgery associated with therapeutic efficacy has been the treatment of choice for acute appendicitis. However, in consequence of the evolution of endoscopic surgery, the operation can also be performed with minimally invasive surgery. Due to smaller incisions, the laparoscopic approach may be associated with reduced postoperative pain, reduced wound infection rate, and shorter time until return to normal activity.This is an update of the review published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) with regard to benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE and Embase (9 February 2018). We identified proposed and ongoing studies from World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials Register (9 February 2018). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and the congress proceedings of endoscopic surgical societies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LA versus OA in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes (or standardised mean differences (SMD) if researchers used different scales such as quality of life) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 85 studies involving 9765 participants. Seventy-five trials included 8520 adults and 10 trials included 1245 children. Most studies had risk of bias issues, with attrition bias being the largest source across studies due to incomplete outcome data.In adults, pain intensity on day one was reduced by 0.75 cm on a 10 cm VAS after LA (MD -0.75, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.45; 20 RCTs; 2421 participants; low-quality evidence). Wound infections were less likely after LA (Peto OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.51; 63 RCTs; 7612 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses was increased following LA (Peto OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.43; 53 RCTs; 6677 participants; moderate-quality evidence).The length of hospital stay was shortened by one day after LA (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.70; 46 RCTs; 5127 participant; low-quality evidence). The time until return to normal activity occurred five days earlier after LA than after OA (MD -4.97, 95% CI -6.77 to -3.16; 17 RCTs; 1653 participants; low-quality evidence). Two studies showed better quality of life scores following LA, but used different scales, and therefore no pooled estimates were presented. One used the SF-36 questionnaire two weeks after surgery and the other used the Gastro-intestinal Quality of Life Index six weeks and six months after surgery (both low-quality evidence).In children, we found no differences in pain intensity on day one (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.65 to 0.05; 1 RCT; 61 participants; low-quality evidence), intra-abdominal abscesses after LA (Peto OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.22; 9 RCTs; 1185 participants; low-quality evidence) or time until return to normal activity (MD -0.50, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.30; 1 RCT; 383 participants; moderate-quality evidence). However, wound infections were less likely after LA (Peto OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.42; 10 RCTs; 1245 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and the length of hospital stay was shortened by 0.8 days after LA (MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.62; 6 RCTs; 316 participants; low-quality evidence). Quality of life was not reported in any of the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Except for a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscesses after LA in adults, LA showed advantages over OA in pain intensity on day one, wound infections, length of hospital stay and time until return to normal activity in adults. In contrast, LA showed advantages over OA in wound infections and length of hospital stay in children. Two studies reported better quality of life scores in adults. No study reported this outcome in children. However, the quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate and some of the clinical effects of LA were small and of limited clinical relevance. Future studies with low risk of bias should investigate, in particular, the quality of life in children.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for adhesional small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) due to adhesions is a common acute surgical presentation. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is being performed more frequently. However, the clear benefits of laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LA) compared with traditional open adhesiolysis (OA) remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of LA versus OA for SBO due to adhesions.

METHODS

A systemic literature review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases of all randomised controlled trials (RCT) and case-controlled studies (CCS) that compared LA with OA for SBO. Data were extracted using a standardised form and subsequently analysed.

RESULTS

There were no RCT. Data from 18 CCS on 38,927 patients (LA = 5,729 and OA = 33,389) were analysed. A meta-analysis showed that LA for SBO has decreased overall mortality (LA = 1.6% vs. OA = 4.9%, p < 0.001) and morbidity (LA = 11.2% vs. OA = 30.9%, p < 0.001). Similarly, the incidences of specific complications are significantly lower in the LA group. There are significantly lower reoperation rate (LA = 4.5% vs. OA = 6.5%, p = 0.017), shorter average operating time (LA = 89 min vs. OA = 104 min, p < 0.001) and a shorter length of stay (LOS) (LA = 6.7 days vs. OA = 11.6 days, p < 0.001) in the LA group. In the CCS, there is likely to be a selection bias favouring less complex adhesions in the LA group that may contribute to the better outcomes in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is a probable selection bias, these results suggest that LA for SBO in selected patients has a reduced mortality, morbidity, reoperation rate, average operating time and LOS compared with OA. LA should be considered in appropriately selected patients with acute SBO due to adhesions.

[Appendectomy: open versus laparoscopic versus single port : Evidence for choice of surgical procedure]

The treatment of choice in acute appendicitis is still the surgical removal of an inflamed vermiform appendix. There is still some disagreement regarding the optimal access route, i.e. conventional open or minimally invasive. The best available evidence is used to answer the question of the current optimal choice of procedure. For laparoscopic appendectomy there are evidence-based benefits in terms of access trauma, postoperative pain, wound infection rates and convalescence. For the alternative minimally invasive procedure single port appendectomy, mini-laparoscopic appendectomy or NOTES appendectomy, there is still a lack of scientific evidence to advocate the broad clinical use of these procedures. It is recommended that whenever the infrastructure permits, laparoscopic appendectomy should be the treatment of choice.

Role of Laparoscopic Appendectomy Radix Ligation Techniques on the Formation of Inner Abdomen Abscess

Objectives:

Our aim was to study whether laparoscopic appendectomy radix ligation techniques were eutrophic in the development of intra-abdominal abscess.

Methods:

Between September 2009 and April 2017, all emergency cases admitted to our surgery polyclinic were reviewed, and the results of the patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were collected. Appendectomy radix ligation techniques were reviewed from surgical notes on discharge reports. Postoperative controls were also reviewed, and any cases with abscess formation were reported.

Results:

A total of 350 patients were included in the study. Of these cases, 207 were males, and 143 were females. The mean age of the patients was 26.89±4.9 years. One hundred eighty-nine cases were found to have two endoloops placed on top of each other, whereas 161 cases had a 2 mm distance left in between the two endoloops and tied. None of the 189 cases who had endoloops placed on top of each other developed abscess formation. However, of the 161 cases who had endoloops with a 2 mm distance in between, 8 reported with abscess formation in the inner abdomen. Of these eight cases, seven had percutaneous abscess drainage by an interventional radiologist, whereas one was treated with relaparoscopy.

Conclusion:

In the present study, patients who had endoloops placed on top of each other developed no abscess formation, whereas in the literature’s gold standard procedure, those with a 2 mm distance left between two endoloops developed an inner abdominal abscess formation in 8 (4.9%) of the patients. We believe that this 2 mm dead space distance left between the two endoloops contributes to the formation of the abscess.

Evolution of incidence, mortality and cost of nontraumatic abdominal emergencies treated in Brasil in a period of nine years

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence, mortality and cost of non-traumatic abdominal emergencies treated in Brazilian emergency departments.

METHODS

This paper used DataSus information from 2008 to 2016 (http://www.tabnet.datasus.gov.br). The number of hospitalizations, costs - AIH length of stay and mortality rates were described in acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, acute pancreatitis, acute diverticulitis, gastric and duodenal ulcer, and inflammatory intestinal disease.

RESULTS

The disease that had the highest growth in hospitalization was diverticular bowel disease with an increase of 68.2%. For the period of nine years, there were no significant changes in the average length of hospital stay, with the highest increase in gastric and duodenal ulcer with a growth of 15.9%. The mortality rate of gastric and duodenal ulcer disease increased by 95.63%, which is significantly high when compared to the other diseases. All had their costs increased but the one that proportionally had the highest increase in the last nine years was the duodenal and gastric ulcer, with an increase of 85.4%.

CONCLUSION

Non-traumatic abdominal emergencies are extremely prevalent. Hence, the importance of having updated and comparative data on the mortality rate, number of hospitalization and cost generated by these diseases to provide better healthcare services in public hospitals.

Risk factors for intraabdominal abscess formation after laparoscopic appendectomy - results from the Pol-LA (Polish Laparoscopic Appendectomy) multicenter large cohort study

Introduction

According to meta-analyses laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with many benefits. However, in comparison to open surgery an increased rate of intraabdominal abscesses (IAA) has been reported. Identification of predictive factors for this complication may help to identify patients with higher risk of IAA.

Aim

To identify potential risk factors for intraabdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

Material and methods

Eighteen surgical units in Poland and Germany submitted data of patients undergoing LA to the online web-based database created by the Polish Videosurgery Society of the Association of Polish Surgeons. It comprised 31 elements related to the pre-, intra- and postoperative period. Surgical outcomes were compared among the groups according to occurrence of IAA. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify potential risk factors for IAA.

Results

4618 patients were included in the analysis. IAA were found in 51 (1.10%) cases. Although several risk factors were found in univariate analysis, in the multivariate model, only the presence of complicated appendicitis was statistically significant (OR = 2.98, 95% CI: 1.11–8.04). Moreover, IAA has a significant influence on postoperative reintervention rate (OR = 126.95, 95% CI: 67.98–237.06), prolonged length of stay > 8 days (OR = 41.32, 95% CI: 22.86–74.72) and readmission rate (OR = 33.89, 95% CI: 18.60–34.73).

Conclusions

Intraabdominal abscesses occurs relatively rarely after LA. It is strongly associated with complicated appendicitis. Occurrence of this complication has a great influence on the postoperative period and due to the nature of its treatment is associated with the need for reintervention, prolonged length of stay and by extension possible readmission.

Outcomes after open and laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Acute appendicitis is the most prevalent cause of non-obstetrical surgical disease during pregnancy. There is no consensus on the optimal surgical management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Our aim is to identify surgical and obstetrical outcomes of laparoscopic (LA) and open approach (OA) in pregnant patients with acute appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for articles published up to May 2017, along with the references of all articles. Prospective and retrospective trials reporting outcomes among pregnant women undergoing laparoscopic and open appendectomy were included. Of the 493 records screened, 20 were eligible for meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Statistical meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6210 pregnant women from twenty studies were included in meta-analysis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with significantly lower overall complication rates and shorter hospital stays (1835 patients OR 0.48 95% CI 0.29, 0.80 p = 0.005). While the open appendectomy group showed prolongation of gestational age for term deliveries, laparoscopic appendectomy patients had higher rates of fetal loss (543 patients MD -0.46 weeks 95% CI-0.87 to -0.04, p = 0.03 and 4867 patients OR 1.82 95% CI 1.30 to 2.57, p = 0.0006, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature remains inconclusive on the optimal approach of appendectomy in pregnant women. Further larger-volume studies are needed in order to elucidate the critical effect of laparoscopic appendectomy on fetal loss rates.

Prospective Observational Study on acute Appendicitis Worldwide (POSAW)

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common surgical disease, and appendectomy is the treatment of choice in the majority of cases. A correct diagnosis is key for decreasing the negative appendectomy rate. The management can become difficult in case of complicated appendicitis. The aim of this study is to describe the worldwide clinical and diagnostic work-up and management of AA in surgical departments.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter observational study was performed in 116 worldwide surgical departments from 44 countries over a 6-month period (April 1, 2016-September 30, 2016). All consecutive patients admitted to surgical departments with a clinical diagnosis of AA were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 4282 patients were enrolled in the POSAW study, 1928 (45%) women and 2354 (55%) men, with a median age of 29 years. Nine hundred and seven (21.2%) patients underwent an abdominal CT scan, 1856 (43.3%) patients an US, and 285 (6.7%) patients both CT scan and US. A total of 4097 (95.7%) patients underwent surgery; 1809 (42.2%) underwent open appendectomy and 2215 (51.7%) had laparoscopic appendectomy. One hundred eighty-five (4.3%) patients were managed conservatively. Major complications occurred in 199 patients (4.6%). The overall mortality rate was 0.28%.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study confirm the clinical value of imaging techniques and prognostic scores. Appendectomy remains the most effective treatment of acute appendicitis. Mortality rate is low.

Bayesian network meta-analysis of the effects of single-incision laparoscopic surgery, conventional laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis

The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) and open appendectomy (OA) for the treatment of acute appendicitis. PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies comparing the effectiveness of different appendectomy methods for treating acute appendicitis published prior to April 2016. ADDIS 1.16.5 software was used for data analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistic. Odds ratios or standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and pooled accordingly. Consistency was assessed using node-splitting analysis and inconsistency standard deviation. Convergence was assessed with the Brooks-Gelman-Rubin method using Potential Scale Reduction Factor (PSRF). Surgical procedure duration, duration of hospital stay, wound infection and incidence of abscesses were compared. A total of 24 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. A consistency model was used to pool data regarding the four outcomes. The PSRFs in each item were all <1.03. Pooled results showed that, compared with OA, SILS and CLA were associated with significantly shorter durations of hospital stay (all P<0.01) and lower risk of wound infection (SILS vs. OA P=0.02 and CLA vs. OA P<0.01, respectively), but no significant differences were identified between SILS and CLA. However, compared with OA, SILS exhibited a significantly longer surgical procedure duration (P=0.01) and lower incidence of abscesses (P=0.04), while no significant difference was observed between OA and CLA. This comprehensive network meta-analysis indicated that laparoscopic appendectomy, including SILS and CLA, may have more advantages for acute appendicitis compared with OA. Furthermore, SILS procedures require improvement and simplification to reduce the surgical procedure duration.

The current management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: should there be a change in paradigm? A systematic review of the literatures and analysis of treatment performance

INTRODUCTION

Appendectomy has long been the mainstay of intervention for acute appendicitis, aiming at preventing perforation, peritonitis, abscess formation and recurrence. With better understanding of the disease process, non-operative management (NOM) with antibiotics alone has been proved a feasible treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. This article aimed at systematically reviewing the available literatures and discussing the question whether NOM should replace appendectomy as the standard first-line treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHOD

A search of the Embase, Pubmed and Cochrane Library was performed using the keywords 'acute appendicitis' and 'antibiotic therapy'. Meta-analysis with inverse variance model for continuous variable and Mantel Haenzel Model for dichotomous variable was performed to evaluate the one year treatment efficacy, morbidities rate, sick leave duration and length of hospital stay associated with emergency appendectomy and NOM.

RESULTS

Six randomized control trials were identified out of 1943 publications. NOM had a significant lower treatment efficacy rate at one year, 0.10 (95% CI 0.03-0.36, p < 0.01), when compared to appendectomy. The morbidities rate was comparable between the two interventions. The length of hospital stay was longer, with a mean difference of 1.08 days (95% CI 0.09-2.07, p = 0.03), and the sick leave duration was shorter, a mean difference of 3.37 days (95% CI -5.90 to -0.85 days, p < 0.01) for NOM.

CONCLUSION

The paradigm remains unchanged, that appendectomy is the gold standard of treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, given its higher efficacy rate when compared to NOM.

Economic evaluation of antibiotic therapy versus appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis from the APPAC randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

An increasing amount of evidence supports antibiotic therapy for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The objective of this study was to compare the costs of antibiotics alone versus appendicectomy in treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis within the randomized controlled APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial.

METHODS

The APPAC multicentre, non-inferiority RCT was conducted on patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients were assigned randomly to appendicectomy or antibiotic treatment. All costs were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis during the 1-year follow-up. The cost estimates were based on cost levels for the year 2012.

RESULTS

Some 273 patients were assigned to the appendicectomy group and 257 to antibiotic treatment. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment did not require appendicectomy during the 1-year follow-up. In the operative group, overall societal costs (€5989·2, 95 per cent c.i. 5787·3 to 6191·1) were 1·6 times higher (€2244·8, 1940·5 to 2549·1) than those in the antibiotic group (€3744·4, 3514·6 to 3974·2). In both groups, productivity losses represented a slightly higher proportion of overall societal costs than all treatment costs together, with diagnostics and medicines having a minor role. Those in the operative group were prescribed significantly more sick leave than those in the antibiotic group (mean(s.d.) 17·0(8·3) (95 per cent c.i. 16·0 to 18·0) versus 9·2(6·9) (8·3 to 10·0) days respectively; P < 0·001). When the age and sex of the patient as well as the hospital were controlled for simultaneously, the operative treatment generated significantly more costs in all models.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis incurred lower costs than those who had surgery.

Profile of the appendectomies performed in the Brazilian Public Health System

Objective

to analyze the profile of appendectomies performed in the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS) and to compare the laparoscopic and laparotomic techniques of appendectomy.

Methods

This work used information from DataSus from 2008 to 2014 (http://datasus.saude.gov.br). We compared the data of patients submitted to laparotomic appendectomy with those submitted to laparoscopic one.

Results

when comparing the total growth of appendectomies, the laparoscopic route increased 279.7%, while the increase in laparotomic surgery was 25% (p <0.001) in the study period. With regard to medical and hospital costs, laparoscopic appendectomy accounted for only 2.6% of the total expenditure on appendectomies performed by the Unified Health System (SUS) hospitals, with an average cost 7.6% lower than that of laparotomy procedures, but without statistical significance. The mortality rate was 57.1% lower in the laparoscopic approach when compared with laparotomy.

Conclusion

there has been a significant increase in the laparoscopic route in the treatment of appendicitis, but the method is still rarely used in SUS patients. The costs of laparoscopic appendectomy were similar to those observed in laparotomic access.

Methodological overview of systematic reviews to establish the evidence base for emergency general surgery

BACKGROUND

The evidence for treatment decision-making in emergency general surgery has not been summarized previously. The aim of this overview was to review the quantity and quality of systematic review evidence for the most common emergency surgical conditions.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of the most common conditions requiring unplanned admission and treatment managed by general surgeons were eligible for inclusion. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases were searched to April 2014. The number and type (randomized or non-randomized) of included studies and patients were extracted and summarized. The total number of unique studies was recorded for each condition. The nature of the interventions (surgical, non-surgical invasive or non-invasive) was documented. The quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

The 106 included reviews focused mainly on bowel conditions (42), appendicitis (40) and gallstone disease (17). Fifty-one (48·1 per cent) included RCTs alone, 79 (74·5 per cent) included at least one RCT and 25 (23·6 per cent) summarized non-randomized evidence alone. Reviews included 727 unique studies, of which 30·3 per cent were RCTs. Sixty-five reviews compared different types of surgical intervention and 27 summarized trials of surgical versus non-surgical interventions. Fifty-seven reviews (53·8 per cent) were rated as low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

This overview of reviews highlights the need for more and better research in this field.

Patient characteristics, outcomes and costs following interhospital transfer to a tertiary facility for appendectomy versus patients who present directly

BACKGROUND

Recent healthcare policy changes have emphasized pay-for-performance. Previous studies have not examined outcome differences between primary presenting appendicitis patients and transferred patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort design examined appendicitis patients between March 2011 and 2013. Patients < age 18, were scheduled for an elective appendectomy, who were pregnant or had an interval appendectomy were excluded.

RESULTS

The transfer cohort (n = 59) had more comorbidities, more severe American Society of Anesthesiologists status, a higher rate of pre-operative abscess/rupture as well as higher rates of perforation, gangrene, intra-operative drain placement and open conversion versus primary presenting patients (n = 622). After statistical regression adjustment, a higher open conversion rate in the transfer cohort, OR = 3.48 (95%CI: 1.04-11.61) and higher total costs $672.47 (95%CI: $68.75-$1276.19) remained.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjustments in clinical outcome/reimbursement metrics may be needed to address the complexity of transfers and the subsequent higher in-hospital costs on tertiary facilities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.