One-Port Laparoscopy-Assisted Appendectomy in Children with Appendicitis: Experience with 100 Cases

A review of minimally invasive single-port/incision laparoscopic appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

Single-port/incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SPILA) is a modern advancement toward stealth surgery, using a single point of entry. Despite the paucity of clinical data, it is increasingly being used to minimize scarring and, potentially, pain associated with the multiple entry points. We aimed to summarize and present available data on this new approach.

METHODOLOGY

All available databases until December 2010 including the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched and cross-referenced for studies describing single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy. Case and experimental reports, series with fewer than 5 patients, and non-English articles were excluded. Outcome measures were operative time, postoperative hospital stay, pain scores, complications, conversion, and mortality, stratified according to type of SPILA approach. SPSS version 18.0.0 software was used for data collection.

RESULTS

Database query yielded 79 articles; 45 were included (1 randomized controlled trial, 44 case series). Total cases were 2806, with mean patient age for studies ranging from 7.0 to 37.5 years. No mortality was reported. The overall complication rate was 4.13%. The overall weighted mean operating time was 41.3 minutes (range, 15.0-95.9 minutes). The weighted mean hospital stay was 2.79 days (range, 1.0-6.6 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the incidence of complications with SPILA remains low and operating times between new and traditional approaches are comparable in case-based literature, adequately powered randomized trials are required to assess its effectiveness. Occurrence of long-term complication types remains unexplored.

Single incision versus standard 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy through a single umbilical incision is an emerging technique supported by case series, but prospective comparative data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing single site umbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy to 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

After IRB approval, patients were randomized to laparoscopic cholecystectomy via a single umbilical incision or standard 4-port access. The primary outcome variable was operative time. Utilizing a power of 0.8 and an alpha of 0.05, 30 patients were calculated for each arm. Patients with complicated disease or weight over 100 kg were excluded. Post-operative management was controlled. Surgeons subjectively scored degree of technical difficulty from 1=easy to 5=difficult.

RESULTS

From 8/2009 through 7/2011, 60 patients were enrolled. There were no differences in patient characteristics. Operative time and degree of difficulty were greater with the single site approach. There were more doses of analgesics used and greater hospital charges in the single site group that trended toward significance.

CONCLUSION

Single site laparoscopic cholecystectomy produces longer operative times with a greater degree of difficulty as assessed by the surgeon. There was a trend toward more doses of post-operative analgesics and greater hospital charges with the single site approach.

Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy through a single umbilical incision is an emerging approach supported by several case series. However, to date, prospective comparative data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing single site umbilical laparoscopic appendectomy to 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

After Internal Review Board approval, patients were randomized to laparoscopic appendectomy via a single umbilical incision or standard 3-port access. The primary outcome variable was postoperative wound infection. Using a power of 0.9 and an alpha of 0.05, 180 patients were calculated for each arm. Patients with perforated appendicitis were excluded. The technique of ligation/division of the appendix and mesoappendix was left to the surgeon's discretion. There were 7 participating surgeons dictated by the call schedule. All patients received the same preoperative antibiotics and postoperative management was controlled.

RESULTS

There were 360 patients were enrolled between August 2009 and November 2010. There were no differences in patient characteristics at presentation. There was no difference in wound infection rate, time to regular diet, length of hospitalization, or time to return to full activity. Operative time, doses of narcotics, surgical difficultly and hospital charges were greater with the single site approach. Also, the mean operative time was 5 minutes longer for the single site group.

CONCLUSION

The single site umbilical laparoscopic approach to appendectomy produces longer operative times resulting in greater charges. However, these small differences are likely of marginal clinical relevance. The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov at the inception of enrollment (NCT00981136).

Technical approaches to single port/incision laparoscopic appendicectomy: a literature review

INTRODUCTION

Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery (SPILS) is a modern advancement toward stealth surgery. Despite the paucity of high-quality scientific studies assessing its effectiveness, this procedure is being used increasingly. This review aims to describe commonly used techniques for SPILS appendicectomies (SPILA), to summarise complication rates in the literature and to provide discussion on indications and implementation.

METHODS

All available databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE(®) and Embase™ were searched in February 2011 and cross-referenced for available English literature describing SPILA in patients of any age.

RESULTS

Three broad technical approaches are described: procedures using laparoscopic instruments through a single skin incision in the abdominal wall, regardless of the number of fascial incisions, with or without the additional use of percutaneous sutures or wires to 'assist' the operation, and hybrid procedures, in which the appendix is exteriorised using a single incision laparoscopically assisted operation but subsequently divided using a conventional 'open' appendicectomy technique. Complication rates seem to be highest in SPILA procedures unassisted by sutures or wires.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research assessing the efficacy of single incision laparoscopic procedures should consider variation in technique as a possible factor affecting outcome.

Single incision versus conventional multi-incision appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendicectomy is a well established surgical procedure used in the management of acute appendicitis.  The operation can be performed with minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic) or as an open procedure. A recent development in appendicectomy has been the introduction of less invasive single incision laparoscopic surgery, using a single multi-luminal port or multiple mono-luminal ports, through a single skin incision. There are yet unanswered questions regarding the efficacy of this new and novel technique including: patient benefit and satisfaction, complications, long-term outcomes, and survival.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to perform meta-analysis using data from available trials comparing single incision with conventional multi-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendicitis, in order to ascertain any differences in outcome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the electronic databases including MEDLINE/PubMed (from 1980 to December 2010), EMBASE/Ovid (from 1980 to December 2010) and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 11) with pre-specified terms. We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of patients with appendicitis, or symptoms of appendicitis, undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy, in which at least one arm involves single incision procedures and another multi-incision procedures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

There were no RCTs or prospectively controlled trials found that met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Three authors performed study selection independently.No studies that met the inclusion criteria of this review were identified. Current evidence exists only the form of case-series.This review has been authored as 'empty' pending the results of 5 ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No RCTs comparing single incision laparoscopic appendectomy with multi-incision surgery could be identified. No definitive conclusions can be made at this time. Well designed prospective RCTs are required in order to evaluate benefit or harm from laparoscopic surgical approaches for appendicectomy. Until appropriate data has been reported, the institutional polices of healthcare providers must be based on the clinical judgement of experts in the field.

The role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery in abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to determine the role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in abdominal and pelvic operations.

DATA SOURCES

The Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were systematically searched until October 2009 using "single-incision laparoscopic surgery" and related terms as keywords. References from retrieved articles were reviewed to broaden the search

STUDY SELECTION

The study included case reports, case series, and empirical studies that reported SILS in abdominal and pelvic operations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Number of patients, type of instruments, operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, length of hospital stay, length of follow-up evaluation, and complications were extracted from the reviewed items

DATA SYNTHESIS

The review included 102 studies classified as level 4 evidence. Most of these studies investigated SILS in cholecystectomy (n=34), appendectomy (n=24), and nephrectomy (n=17). For these procedures, operative time, hospital stay, and complications were comparable with those of conventional laparoscopy. Conversion to conventional laparoscopy was seldom performed in cholecystectomy (range, 0-24%) and more frequent in appendectomy (range, 0-41%) and nephrectomy (range, 0-33%).

CONCLUSION

The potential benefits of SILS include superior cosmesis and possibly shorter operative time, lower costs, and a shortened time to full physical recovery. Careful case selection and a low threshold of conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery are essential. Multicenter, randomized, prospective studies are needed to compare short- and long-term outcome measures against those of conventional laparoscopic surgery.