A prospective randomized trial comparing open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

Appendicitis in pregnancy, higher rate of perforation compared to nonpregnant patients

Objectives

To compare clinical presentation and diagnostic evaluation to identify differences in treatment between pregnant and nonpregnant patients with appendicitis.

Methods

Retrospective case-control study comparing 12 pregnant and 60 nonpregnant, age-matched patients who had an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (pathology confirmed) between January 1, 2011 and June 30, 2019. We compared maternal characteristics, laboratory test results, physical examination findings, diagnostic work-up, surgical modality, and surgical outcomes.

Results

There was no difference in symptom profile and pain intensity at presentation between groups. More pregnant patients had right upper quadrant tenderness (83.3% vs. 31 %, p=0.03) and were more likely to have more than one imaging diagnostic modality (75% vs. 15 %, p<0.01). In nonpregnant patients, computed tomography was the main diagnostic modality (90 %) whereas there was more variation in imaging for pregnant patients. For pregnant patients, time from presentation to surgery (20.0 ± 11.8 h vs. 9.9 ± 4.9 h; p=0.01) and time from presentation to receipt of antibiotics (14.5 ± 12.0 h vs. 5.9 ± 3.2 h, p<0.01) were twice that of nonpregnant patients. Surgery duration was similar between groups (pregnant: 54.8 ± 31.3 min vs. nonpregnant: 45.6 ± 19.5 min, p=0.34). All nonpregnant patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Seven pregnant patients underwent laparoscopy, three had laparotomy, and two began with laparoscopy that was converted to laparotomy. More pregnant patients perforated (25 % vs. 3.3 %, p=0.03).

Conclusions

Despite having similar presentations, it took twice as long to treat pregnant patients with antibiotics and perform an appendectomy. More perforations occurred in pregnant patients compared to nonpregnant patients.

Outcome of Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Retrospective Study From a Local Secondary Referral Hospital

Introduction Laparoscopic appendectomy is currently considered the operation of choice for patients with suspected acute appendicitis. This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic appendectomy in the setting of a secondary referral hospital. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023. Records of patients older than 14 years of age who underwent appendectomy were retrieved. Patients were divided according to the type of technique used into two groups: group I (G1) consisted of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and group II (G2) included those with an open appendectomy. Patients who underwent interval appendectomy or incidental to other procedures were excluded. The two groups were compared in terms of patient demographics, pathological findings, operative time, postoperative course, and outcome. Results Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 101 patients while open appendectomy was done in 121 patients. There were no statistical differences between both groups regarding operative time, blood loss, time for oral intake resumption, hospital stay, or postoperative complications. Despite being not statistically significant, surgical site infection was lower in G1 as compared to G2 (3% versus 8.3%, p=0.09). Narcotic use was significantly less following laparoscopic appendectomy. In the late settings cases of G1, there was a relatively improved mean operative time (32.7 ±18.3) when compared to early settings appendectomy (62.4±26.3), which was statistically significant (P=0.001). Conclusion Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe, feasible, and adoptable even by junior staff. Therefore, it could be applicable in settings of secondary referral hospitals as an initial line of management when performed by an expert surgeon or trainee under the supervision of seniors.

A dual-view multi-resolution laparoscope for safer and more efficient minimally invasive surgery

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is limited in safety and efficiency by the hand-held nature and narrow fields of view of traditional laparoscopes. A multi-resolution foveated laparoscope (MRFL) was invented to address these concerns. The MRFL is a stationary dual-view imaging device with optical panning and zooming capabilities. It is designed to simultaneously capture and display a zoomed view and supplemental wide view of the surgical field. Optical zooming and panning capabilities facilitate repositioning of the zoomed view without physically moving the system. Additional MRFL features designed to improve safety and efficiency include its snub-nosed endoscope, tool-tip auto tracking, programmable focus profiles, unique selectable display modalities, foot pedal controls, and independently controlled surgeon and assistant displays. An MRFL prototype was constructed to demonstrate and test these features. Testing of the prototype validates its design architecture and confirms the functionality of its features. The current MRFL prototype functions adequately as a proof of concept, but the system features and performance require further improvement to be practical for clinical use.

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy: A Prospective Comparative Study and 4-Year Experience in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Background The aim of this study was to validate the pros of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) over open appendectomy (OA) and to compare various primary outcome measures in the management of acute and recurrent appendicitis.

Study Design Prospective comparative study.

Place and Duration Between June 2015 and October 2019 in JJ Hospital, Mumbai.

Materials and Methods Total of 60 patients with acute and recurrent appendicitis were included in the study. Thirty patients underwent OA and 30 underwent LA. Both groups were comparable clinicopathologically and demographically. Various intraoperative and postoperative parameters were compared. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and categorical variables were expressed as percentages. Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare continuous variables and chi-squared test was used to compare categorical variables. p-Value≤0.001 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results The median age of patients undergoing OA and LA was 24.9 and 25.2 years (p = 0.221), respectively. Female: male ratio in OA and LA was 1.30 and 1.14, respectively (p = 0.795). Mean operative duration in LA and OA group was 47.17 ± 14.39 minutes and 36.9 ± 12.33 minutes (p = 0.001), respectively. Mean length of postoperative stay in LA and OA group was 3.69 ± 0.71 days and 5.28 ± 0.63 days (p = 0.000), respectively. Median visual analogue scale score in LA and OA group was 3.5 and 5 (p = 0.001), respectively. Mean time to return to normal activity in LA and OA group was 8.13 ± 1.33 days and 10.10 ± 2.20 days (p = 0.000), respectively. About 6.66% patients in LA group and 13.33% in OA group had postoperative wound infection (p = 0.652). Mean scar scale scoring done on 30th postoperative day was 4.23 in LA and 8.23 in OA (p = 0.000).

Discussion and Conclusion LA is more promising than OA in the management of acute and recurrent appendicitis. LA offers lesser operative site pain in the postoperative period, shorter postoperative hospital stays, earlier recovery, and return to normal activities and cosmetically better scars on 30th day follow-up. No conversions or significant difference in wound related complications were seen in both groups. Prolonged intraoperative duration was the only drawback of LA.

Computer-aided Veress needle guidance using endoscopic optical coherence tomography and convolutional neural networks

During laparoscopic surgery, the Veress needle is commonly used in pneumoperitoneum establishment. Precise placement of the Veress needle is still a challenge for the surgeon. In this study, a computer-aided endoscopic optical coherence tomography (OCT) system was developed to effectively and safely guide Veress needle insertion. This endoscopic system was tested by imaging subcutaneous fat, muscle, abdominal space, and the small intestine from swine samples to simulate the surgical process, including the situation with small intestine injury. Each tissue layer was visualized in OCT images with unique features and subsequently used to develop a system for automatic localization of the Veress needle tip by identifying tissue layers (or spaces) and estimating the needle-to-tissue distance. We used convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in automatic tissue classification and distance estimation. The average testing accuracy in tissue classification was 98.53 ± 0.39%, and the average testing relative error in distance estimation reached 4.42 ± 0.56% (36.09 ± 4.92 μm).

Laparoscopic Appendectomy Translates into Less Analgesics and Faster Return to Work in Asia

Background:

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is claimed to require less analgesic and allow for a faster return to work. This study examines whether these benefits hold true in Asian patient populations.

Methods:

A retrospective audit of emergency appendectomies over one year was conducted to study outcomes of postoperative pain, length of stay (LOS), duration of analgesia, and hospitalization leave (HL). A telephone questionnaire evaluated post-discharge analgesic intake, residual symptoms at follow-up, adequacy of HL and opinion on teleconsult reviews.

Results:

Of the 201 patients, 187 (93%) underwent LA. Presurgery symptoms were significantly longer in the open appendectomy (OA) group (mean: OA 3.79, LA 1.81 days; p = 0.026) which also had a higher frequency of perforation (71.4%). LA patients reported less pain compared to OA (LA 3.60 vs. OA 4.14; p = 0.068) but were prescribed the same 2 weeks of analgesics as OA. LOS was significantly less for LA (mean LA 3.09, OA 6.93 days; p = 0.006). Mean HL for LA and OA were 17.9 and 21.8 days respectively (p = 0.05). Nearly 83% patients did not complete the prescribed course of analgesics and 47% patients felt that HL was more than adequate. Seventy-five percent of patients were asymptomatic at hospital follow-up and nearly 41% agreed to teleconsult reviews.

Conclusion:

Majority of LA patients do not need 2 weeks of analgesics and their HL can be shortened for faster return to work thereby realizing the true benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Selected cases can be offered postoperative teleconsultation.

Updated Evaluation of Laparoscopic vs. Open Appendicectomy During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To explore the updated evaluation about the obstetrical and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) for pregnancy appendicitis compared with open appendicectomy (OA). Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to screen eligible studies up to December 2020. Only clinical researches, no < 10 cases for LA and OA group were included. Twenty retrospective studies with 7,248 pregnant women, evaluating LA and OA in surgical and obstetrical outcomes, were included. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI and odds ratio (OR) was used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables. It seems LA was connected with significantly shorter hospital time and lower wound infection [mean difference (MD), −0.57 days; 95% CI, −0.96 to −0.18; p = 0.004 and OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.62; p = 0.0005, respectively]. The incidence of fetal loss after LA was higher than OA (OR,1.93; 95% CI, 1.39–2.69; p < 0.0001). It was almost similar in the rate of preterm delivery (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.34; p = 0.40) and other perioperative and obstetrical complications (p > 0.05). Our results indicated that the occurrence of fetal loss after LA should not be ignored. Caution, skillful operation, and thoroughly informed consent about the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy are necessary.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021233150.

Validating the efficacy of interval appendectomy for acute appendicitis: representative three cases with different etiologies

Background

Appendectomy for acute appendicitis (AA) is considered one of the most common emergency surgeries. However, emergency appendectomy accompanied with complex lesions such as extensive abscess formation is not recommended in most cases. Therefore, non-operative management followed by interval appendectomy (IA) for AA has been tried. Herein, we present three AA cases with specific etiology that underwent interval appendectomy.

Case presentation

Case 1: A 68-year-old man was diagnosed AA with intestinal malrotation and intra-abdominal abscesses. He initially treated with conservative therapy and underwent laparoscopic IA after detailed preoperative examination.

Case 2: A 22-year-old man had been under treatment for pancolitis-type ulcerative colitis (UC), also bothered by right-lower abdominal pain several times a year. The appendix always appeared swollen on every CT taken during symptoms. He underwent laparoscopic IA; pathological finding revealed typical UC histological features in the resected appendix. After the surgery, he never suffered from terrible right lower abdominal pain.

Case 3: A 69-year-old woman complaining a right lower abdominal pain had undergone CT examination, which revealed AA with appendiceal mass, irregular wall thickness of the cecum, and mediastinal and para-aortic lymph node swelling. The operation was carried out after conservative therapy. The pathological diagnosis revealed BRAF mutated colorectal carcinoma. She had received systematic chemotherapy after the surgery, and all metastatic lesions have completely disappeared.

Conclusion

Interval appendectomy provided us with much clearer anatomical information and precise therapeutic strategies, avoiding technical and general operative complications, and also induced fast recovery and short length of hospital stay. Interval appendectomy is a reasonable procedure and could be recommended in case of AA with some different etiology.

Nighttime Appendectomy is Safe and has Similar Outcomes as Daytime Appendectomy: A Study of 1198 Appendectomies

Introduction:

Although it is controversial whether appendectomy can be safely delayed, it is often unnecessary to postpone operation as a shorter delay may increase patient comfort, enables quicker recovery, and decreases costs. In this study, we sought to study whether the time of day influences the outcomes among patients operated on for acute appendicitis.

Materials and Methods:

Consecutive patients undergoing appendectomy at Tampere University Hospital between 1 September 2014 and 30 April 2017 for acute appendicitis were included. Primary outcome measures were postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, and amount of intraoperative bleeding. Appendectomies were divided into daytime and nighttime operations.

Results:

A total of 1198 patients underwent appendectomy, of which 65% were operated during daytime and 35% during nighttime. Patient and disease-related characteristics were similar in both groups. The overall morbidity and mortality rates were 4.8% and 0.2%, respectively. No time categories were associated with risk of complications or complication severity. Neither was there difference in operation time and clinically significant difference in intraoperative bleeding. Patients undergoing surgery during night hours had a shorter hospital stay. In multivariate analysis, only complicated appendicitis was associated with worse outcomes.

Discussion:

We have shown that nighttime appendectomy is associated with similar outcomes than daytime appendectomy. Subsequently, appendectomy should be planned for the next available slot, minimizing delay whenever possible.

Resident Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Appendectomy According to Seniority

PURPOSE

To delineate the learning curve (LC) for laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) performed by residents according to seniority in training.

METHODS

Between October 2015 and November 2016, 150 patients underwent LA by three residents (in their first, second, and third year of training) under supervision. The patients were non-randomly assigned to each resident. The data were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively from prospectively collected database. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the three residents including operation time, complication, conversion, and so on. The LCs were evaluated by the moving average method and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) for operation time and surgical completion.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were similar except for age and location of the appendix among the three groups. Operation time was not different among the three residents (43.9, 45.3, and 48.4 min for A, B, and C, respectively). The moving average method for operation time showed a decreasing tendency for all residents. CUSUM for operation time showed that the peak points occurred at the 24th, 18th, and 31st cases for resident A, B, and C, respectively. In terms of surgical failure, residents A, B, and C reached steady states after the 35th, 11th, and 16th cases, respectively. Perforation of the appendix base was the only risk factor for surgical failure.

CONCLUSION

The LC for LA by residents was 11-35 cases according to multidimensional statistical analyses. The accumulation of surgical experience of residents might affect the LC, especially for surgical completion rather than for operation time.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe procedure for beginners to perform: experience from 1948 cases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SIL-A) has recently become an option for treating appendicitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and surgical outcomes of SIL-A by residents and surgeons during the learning period.

METHODS

A total of 1948 consecutive patients who underwent SIL-A from May 2008 to November 2014 were studied retrospectively. Surgeries were performed by residents and eight surgeons. Prior to the first case, surgeons and residents had been trained in a training protocol during the learning period. Three initial cases of SIL-A were performed under the supervision of experienced surgeons. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (learning period, n = 483), the first 40 cases by each surgeon and resident; and group 2 (experienced period, n = 1465), cases after the 40th procedure performed by each surgeon. Surgical results were compared between the two groups by performing propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in patient demographics and characteristics of appendicitis between the two groups. The operating time was longer in group 1 than in group 2 (45.3 ± 18.0 vs. 33.9 ± 16.1 min, p < 0.001). The morbidity rate (7.0% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.795) was similar between the two groups. Readmission rate (2.1% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.414) and reoperation rate (0.8% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.348) were also similar between the two groups. However, the rate of incisional hernia occurrence (0.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.066) tended to be larger in group 1 than in group 2 without showing a significant difference.

CONCLUSION

SIL-A is a technically feasible and safe procedure when it is performed by residents and surgeons during learning period under an appropriate training protocol. However, residents and surgeons in the learning period should perform it carefully to prevent incisional hernias.

Laparoscopic-assisted versus open total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation: A case-matched study of pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Total Pancreatectomy and Islet Autotransplantation (TPIAT) are a potential treatment for children with severe, refractory chronic pancreatitis. A laparoscopic-assisted approach provides a smaller incision and excellent visualization of the distal pancreas and spleen during resection. A minimally-invasive approach has proven advantageous for other pediatric procedures, but its value is unknown for this rare operation. This retrospective review compares outcomes between patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted versus open TPIAT.

STUDY DESIGN

Children (n = 21) receiving laparoscopic-assisted TPIAT from 2013 to 2015 and children (n = 21) receiving open TPIAT from 2011 to 2015 were matched based on age, gender, symptom duration, previous interventions, and pancreatic fibrosis scores. Data reviewed included postoperative complications, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative blood transfusions, number of islet equivalents (IEQ)/kg transplanted, hospital length-of-stay, graft function, narcotic use, and Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire scores. Between-group differences were compared using Fisher's exact, Chi-square, and T-tests.

RESULTS

Surgical complications were similar between surgical groups (p = 0.35) and included wound complications (n = 11), chyle leak (n = 7), bowel obstruction (n = 5), bile leak (n = 3), gastrointestinal bleed (n = 2), and pneumonia (n = 1). There were no significant differences in operative time (p = 0.18), EBL (p = 0.96), blood transfusions (p = 0.34), IEQ/kg transplanted (p = 0.15), and hospital length-of-stay (p = 0.66). Insulin and opioid use was similar except for a slightly higher use of opioids (n = 4) at 2 years in the laparoscopic group. Patient surgical scar satisfaction was similar between groups (p = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes for laparoscopic-assisted TPIAT appear comparable to open TPIAT. In children, a minimally-invasive approach does not compromise safety, effectiveness, or operative efficiency and may be used based on surgeon and patient preference.

Safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric surgical presentation during pregnancy. There were concerns that laparoscopic appendicectomy increases the risk of foetal loss compared to an open approach. Therefore, with recent advances in perioperative care, it is likely the risk has changed. Here, we performed an updated meta-analysis assessing the safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnant women.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was undertaken between 2000 and 2017 on Ovid Medline and Embase. The primary outcome measures were foetal loss and preterm delivery, whereas secondary outcome measures were operative time and hospital length of stay. A random-effect model was performed to pool odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

Seventeen observational studies were included, with 1886 patients in the laparoscopic and 4261 patients in the open group. Comparing laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy, there were 54 (5.96%) and 136 (3.73%) foetal losses, respectively. However, preterm delivery was much higher in the open approach (8.99%) compared to laparoscopic approach (2.84%). Pooled OR for foetal loss was 1.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-2.58, P < 0.001), whereas OR for preterm delivery was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27-0.55, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both approaches for operative time (SMD -0.07; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.30, P = 0.71) or hospital length of stay (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.83 to 0.16, P = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

In a pooled analysis of level III evidence, laparoscopic appendicectomy posed a higher risk of foetal loss but lower risk of preterm delivery. Caution and informed consent are crucial when offering a laparoscopic approach.

Mini-Incision Open Appendectomy with Incision Skin Tissue Retractor vs. Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Retrospective Study of the Management of Child Acute Appendicitis

Introduction

This study aims to compare the clinical effects of an incision skin tissue retractor for mini-incision open appendectomy and laparoscopic surgery for pediatric appendicitis.

Methods

From January 2014 to July 2017, a total of 248 patients were included in the present study. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed for 108 cases (LA group), and mini-incision open appendectomy with an incision skin tissue retractor was performed for 140 cases (MOA-ISTR group). Then, medical history, age, gender, operative duration, amount of bleeding during the operation, the determination of whether or not the appendix was perforated during the operation, hospitalization days, total cost of hospitalization, and complications after the operation (incision infection or intestinal obstruction) were compared. The SPSS 20.0 software package was used for the statistical analysis.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in history, age, gender, perioperative perforation of the appendix, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative complications (incisional infection or intestinal obstruction, P  > 0.05). However, the values for duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss and total hospitalization expense were smaller, when compared with the LA group (P  < 0.05).

Conclusion

Mini-incision open appendectomy with an incision skin tissue retractor has similar efficacy and incision appearance when compared with laparoscopic appendectomy. Furthermore, this approach leads to shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss and less hospitalization time, and is more convenient, especially for perforated appendicitis. Moreover, it can be widely used for pediatric appendicitis, and is more suitable for doctors who are not skilled in basic hospitals and laparoscopy.

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.

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.

Transumbilical extracorporeal laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy

AIM OF THE STUDY

The perfect balance between safety, cosmesis, and cost effectiveness in a world with ever growing healthcare costs has yet to be found for nonperforated appendicitis. The aim is to present our data regarding safety and cost effectiveness of the transumbilical extracorporeal laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy technique.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for all laparoscopic appendectomies for acute appendicitis from October 2014 to October 2016. All cases of perforated appendicitis were excluded (visible hole/abscess/free pus). Included cases were divided into two groups by operative technique: transumbilical (TU) or laparoscopic 3-port (L3P). Operating room charges were billed in 30-min intervals, and hospital charges billed per night in-house. The technique was that the appendix is identified with the laparoscope, grabbed with a grasper that is inserted parallel to the laparoscope, and exteriorized through the umbilicus. The appendectomy is completed extracorporeally.

RESULTS

A total of 494 cases of nonperforated appendicitis were included in the study. One surgeon attempted all cases with the TU technique (n=161), and all other surgeons used the L3P technique (n=333), which required an endostapler and a vascular sealing device. The TU technique was successful in 99 of the attempted cases. The mean operative time of the TU cases and the L3P cases was 21 (8-43) and 37 (12-73) min, respectively (P<0.001). The mean hospital stay for the TU and the L3P cases was 1.6 (1-5) days (one-night admission) and 2.4 (1-14) days (two-night admission), respectively (P<0.001). There were no operative complications or readmissions in either group. The overall cost of the L3P cases was 30% higher than the cost of the TU cases.

CONCLUSION

The transumbilical extracorporeal laparoscopic-assisted technique was as safe as the laparoscopic 3-port technique. It offered all the advantages of a minimally invasive procedure, was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay, and was remarkably more cost effective than the standard laparoscopic 3-port technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be successfully performed for uncomplicated appendicitis: A Southwestern Surgical Congress multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Many laparoscopic procedures are now performed on an outpatient basis. We hypothesize laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed as an outpatient procedure.

METHODS

Seven institutions adopted a previously described outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy protocol for uncomplicated appendicitis. Patients were dismissed unless there was a clinical indication for admission. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, time of dismissal, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Two hundred six men and one hundred seventy women with a mean age of 35.4 years were included in the protocol. Seventy-eight patients (21%) had pre-existing comorbidities. 299 patients (80%) were managed as outpatients. There were no conversions to open appendectomy. Postoperative morbidity was 5%. The time of patient dismissals was evenly distributed throughout the day and night. Twelve patients (3%) required readmission. Outpatient follow-up occurred in 63% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

An outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy protocol was successfully applied at multiple institutions with low morbidity and low readmission rates. Application of this practice nationally could reduce length of stay and decrease overall health care costs for acute appendicitis.

Development of five-finger robotic hand using master-slave control for hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery

This study aims to develop a robotic hand as a substitute for a surgeon's hand in hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS). We determined the requirements for the proposed hand from a surgeon's motions in HALS. We identified four basic behaviors: "power grasp," "precision grasp," "open hand for exclusion," and "peace sign for extending peritoneum." The proposed hand had the minimum necessary DOFs for performing these behaviors, five fingers as in a human's hand, a palm that can be folded when a surgeon inserts the hand into the abdomen, and an arm for adjusting the hand's position. We evaluated the proposed hand based on a performance test and a physician's opinions, and we confirmed that it can grasp organs.

Cost Effectiveness of a Fast-Track Protocol for Urgent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies and Appendectomies

BACKGROUND

Fast-track protocols (FTPs) are used to decrease length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective outpatient procedures. Few institutions have implemented FTP for urgent procedures such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study including all patients undergoing urgent LC or LA between July 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013. Exclusion criteria included conversion to open procedure, perforated appendicitis, or procedure related to intra-abdominal injury. Analysis included a comparison of the three study groups: (1) before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation of the fast-track protocol (FTP), (2) fast-track cohort (FT) and non-fast-track cohort (NFT), and (3) those completing the fast-track pathway (FT-C) and those who began but failed to complete the pathway (FT-F).

RESULTS

There were significant reductions in LOS between all study groups compared: between PRE (n = 256) and POST (n = 472) cohorts by half a day (2.0 vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.02); between FT and NFT (0.68 vs. 1.82 days, p < 0.01); and FT-C and FT-F (0.49 vs. 1.05 days, p < 0.01). Total hospital charges were significantly reduced in FT compared with NFT ($22,347 vs. $30,868, p < 0.01) with an average savings of $8521. Total hospital charges were decreased in the FT-C compared with FT-F cohorts ($21,971 vs. $22,939, p = 0.3) with an average savings of $968. Readmissions, complications, and satisfaction were similar for all comparison groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FTPs for urgent appendectomies and cholecystectomies can significantly reduce hospital costs by reducing LOS without compromising patient outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed in emergency surgery. Because of lack of consensus about the most appropriate technique, appendectomy is still being performed by both open (OA) and laparoscopic (LA) methods. In this retrospective analysis, we aimed to compare the laparoscopic approach and the conventional technique in the treatment of acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Retrospectively collected data from 593 consecutive patients with acute appendicitis were studied. These comprised 310 patients who underwent conventional appendectomy and 283 patients treated laparoscopically. The two groups were compared for operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rate, return to normal activity and cost.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter hospital stay (2.7 ± 2.5 days in LA and 1.4 ± 0.6 days in OA), with a less need for analgesia and with a faster return to daily activities (11.5 ± 3.1 days in LA and 16.1 ± 3.3 in OA). Operative time was significantly shorter in the open group (31.36 ± 11.13 min in OA and 54.9 ± 14.2 in LA). Total number of complications was less in the LA group with a significantly lower incidence of wound infection (1.4 % vs 10.6 %, P <0.001). The total cost of treatment was higher by 150 € in the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach is a safe and efficient operative procedure in appendectomy and it provides clinically beneficial advantages over open method (including shorter hospital stay, decreased need for postoperative analgesia, early food tolerance, earlier return to work, lower rate of wound infection) against only marginally higher hospital costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02867072 Registered 10 August 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Comparison of clinical outcome of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is now the treatment of choice in uncomplicated appendicitis. To date its importance in the treatment of complicated appendicitis is not clearly defined.

METHODS

From January 2005 to June 2013 a total of 1762 patients underwent appendectomy for the suspected diagnosis of appendicitis at our institution. Of these patients 1516 suffered from complicated appendicitis and were enrolled. In total 926 (61 %) underwent open appendectomy (OA) and 590 (39 %) underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). The following parameters were retrospectively analyzed: age, sex, operative times, histology, length of hospital stay, 30-day morbidity focusing on occurrence of surgical site infections, intraabdominal abscess formation, postoperative ileus and appendiceal stump insufficiency, conversion rate, use of endoloops and endostapler.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference in operative time was observed between the laparoscopic and the open group (64.5 vs. 60 min; p = 0.002). Median length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.000). Surgical site infections occurred exclusively after OA (38 vs. 0 patients). Intraabdominal abscess formation occurred statistically significantly more often after LA (2 vs. 10 patients; p = 0.002). There were no statistical significances concerning the occurrence of postoperative ileus (p = 0.261) or appendiceal stump insufficiencies (p = 0.076).

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach for complicated appendicitis is a safe and feasible procedure. Surgeons should be aware of a potentially higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess formation following LA. Use of endobags , inversion of the appendiceal stump and carefully conducted local irrigation of the abdomen in a supine position may reduce the incidence of abscess formation.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Is It Time to End the Discussion?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is typically associated with inpatient hospitalization averaging between 1 and 2 days. In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the post-anesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met certain predefined criteria. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management.

STUDY DESIGN

An IRB-approved, retrospective review of a prospective database was performed on all patients having laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2014. Study exclusions included age younger than 17 years, pregnancy, interval appendectomy, and gangrenous or perforated appendicitis. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 281 men and 282 women, with a mean age of 35.5 years. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (86%) were managed as outpatients. Seventy-nine patients were admitted for pre-existing conditions (32 patients), postoperative morbidity (10 patients), physician discretion (6 patients), or lack of transportation or support at home (31 patients). Thirty-eight patients (6.7%) experienced postoperative morbidity. Seven patients (1.2%) were readmitted after outpatient management for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, migraine headache, urinary tract infection, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. There were no mortalities or reoperations. Including the readmissions, overall success with outpatient management was 85%.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, low morbidity, and low readmission rate. This protocol has withstood the test of time. Widespread adoption has the potential for substantial health care savings.

A lower neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio is closely associated with catarrhal appendicitis versus severe appendicitis

PURPOSE

Catarrhal appendicitis (CA) could be treated effectively with antibiotics in some patients because of the milder inflammation associated with this form of appendicitis. Although several trials have compared surgery with antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis (AA), the indications for antibiotic therapy remain controversial.

METHODS

The subjects of this study were 342 patients who underwent appendectomy at our hospital between January, 2000 and March, 2013. The patients were divided into two groups based on the severity of their appendicitis: Group A comprised patients with severe appendicitis and Group B comprised patients with CA. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the clinical features associated with CA.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis of the eight clinical features correlated with CA according to univariate analysis revealed that the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (<5/>5), age (<38/>38 years), fever (<38/>38 °C), white blood cell count (<11.5/>11.5 × 10³/mm³) and serum level of C-reactive protein (<110/>110 mg/L) were significantly associated with CA. The NLR (<5/>5) (OR 0.421; 95 % CI 0.218-0.811; P = 0.010) was the most useful predictor of CA, because the area under the ROC curve of NLR was the lowest of all these features.

CONCLUSION

The preoperative NLR in patients undergoing appendectomy is closely associated with CA.

Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique in patients with complicated and noncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background and aim

In our study we aimed to compare laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique (base of the appendix was ligated with 20 cm of 2.0 silk) in patients with complicated acute appendicitis (CAA) and noncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Patients and methods

Ninety patients (female/male: 40/50, age ranging from 16 to 60 years, median age and interquartile range [IQR]: 25 [20; 32] years) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were included in the study. The patients were evaluated for the type of acute appendicitis, duration of operation, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

Results

The number of cases diagnosed as CAA was 28 (31.1%), and the number of noncomplicated cases was 62 (68.9%). We found that there was no significant difference in postoperative complication rates between complicated and noncomplicated appendicitis cases. Incision site infection was seen in seven cases (7.8%) and ileus was seen in two cases (2.2%). Bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, and appendix stump leakage were not observed in any of the cases. Median and IQR duration of operation were 42 (35; 52) minutes and median and IQR duration of hospital stay were detected as 2 (1; 2) (range 1–10) days.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting technique may be a safe, effective, and reliable technique as the materials needed for closing the appendix stumps are easily available for both CAA cases and noncomplicated cases.

The preoperative serum C-reactive protein level is a useful predictor of surgical site infections in patients undergoing appendectomy

PURPOSE

Although surgical site infections (SSI) are a major postoperative complication of appendectomy, few studies have focused on the risk factors for SSI. In this study, we investigated the risk factors for SSI in patients who had undergone appendectomy.

METHODS

Three hundred patients who had undergone open appendectomy were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of SSI. A statistical analysis was performed to assess the clinical features associated with SSI after appendectomy.

RESULTS

A multivariate analysis using the results of univariate analyses revealed that the serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level (≤ 65/> 65, mg/l), length of the operation (≤ 80/> 80, min) and pathology (catarrhal, phlegmonous/gangrenous) were associated with SSI. Among these three clinical features, only the CRP level was found to predict the risk of SSI prior to appendectomy (odds ratio 3.797; 95 % confidence intervals 1.305-11.04; P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative elevation of the serum CRP level (> 65 mg/l) is a valuable predictor of SSI in patients undergoing appendectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for complicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled trial to prove safety

BACKGROUND

To date, no randomized control trial has been performed comparing open appendectomy (OA) to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in complicated appendicitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis in 2010 concluded LA is advantageous to OA with less surgical site sepsis in complicated appendicitis; however, the level of evidence is weak (level 3a). The aim of the study was to determine whether LA is safe in the treatment of complicated appendicitis. Primary outcome included all-cause mortality and procedure-related mortality; secondary outcomes included intra-operative duration, rates of wound sepsis and re-intervention, length of hospital stay and re-admission rates.

METHODS

One hundred and fourteen patients were randomized prospectively to either OA or LA using a computer-generated blind method. Patients who were either less than 12 years of age, had previous abdominal surgery or were pregnant were excluded. A team of senior surgeons capable of doing both OA and LA performed all procedures.

RESULTS

The intra-operative duration, the rate of wound sepsis, the number of re-operations, the length of hospital stay and the rate of re-admissions between the OA and LA groups did not differ statistically.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe in complicated appendicitis. Current Control Trials (ISRCTN92257749).

Role of Drains in Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Complicated Appendicitis at a Busy County Hospital

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has become the treatment of choice for acute appendicitis with equal or better outcomes than traditional open appendectomy (OA). LA in patients with a gangrenous or perforated appendicitis carries increased rate of pelvic abscess formation when compared with OA. We hypothesized routine placement of pelvic drains in gangrenous or perforated appendicitis decreases pelvic abscess formation after LA. Three hundred thirty-one patients undergoing LA between January 2007 and June 2011 were reviewed. Patients with perforated or gangrenous appendicitis were included. Group I had a Jackson-Pratt (JP) drain(s) placed and Group II had no JP drain. Data included patient demographics, emergency department laboratory values and vital signs, and computed axial tomography scan findings, intra-abdominal or pelvic abscess postoperatively, interventional radiology drainage, and length of stay. Clinic follow-up notes were reviewed. One hundred forty-eight patients were identified. Forty-three patients had placement of JP drains (Group I) and 105 patients had no JP drain (Group II). Three patients (three of 43 [6%]) in Group I developed pelvic abscess and 21 of 105 (20%) patients in Group II developed pelvic abscesses requiring subsequent drainage. This was statistically significant. Patient demographics, temperature, and mean white blood count before surgery were similar. Presurgery computed tomography (CT) with appendicolith and CT with abscess were more prevalent in Group I. The use of JP drainage in patients with perforated or gangrenous appendicitis during LA has decreased rates of pelvic abscess. This was demonstrated despite the drain group having appendicolith or abscess on preoperative CT.

Utility of the laparoscopic approach to surgical treatment of acute appendicitis in a single surgical unit

Introduction

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common reasons for emergency surgery within the abdominal cavity in Poland.

Aim

To compare outcomes of surgical treatment of AA using both classical (OA) and laparoscopic methods (LA).

Material and methods

Retrospective analysis of 299 patients (157 men and 142 women) operated on in 2008–2011 due to AA. The following comparisons between LA and OA were done: mean operative time, mean hospital stay after surgery, conversion rate, proportion of LA to OA in successive years.

Results

Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 170 (56.9%) patients (74 men and 96 women), whereas OA was done in 89 (29.8%) patients (44 men and 45 women). In 13.4% of patients (24 men and 16 women) conversion from LA to OA was done. Mean operating time was 53.4 ±16.1 min (range: 25–100 min) for LA, and 55.4 ±20.2 min (range: 20–140 min) for OA; p = 0.64. Mean hospital stay after LA was 4.0 ±1.2 days (range: 2–9 days), while it was 6.0 ±4.2 days (range: 2–28 days) after OA; p < 0.001. Laparoscopic appendectomy was 24.1% of all appendectomies performed in the year 2008, 54.1% in the year 2009, and in consecutive years 71.7% in 2010 and 65.6% in 2011.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic appendectomy method did not require longer surgery times and entailed shorter hospital stays as compared with OA. In our opinion, LA should be the preferred approach in surgical treatment of AA in adults.

Defining the learning curve for team-based laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to define the learning curves for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) with and without laparoscopic reconstruction, using paired surgical teams consisting of advanced laparoscopic-trained surgeons and advanced oncologic-trained surgeons.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PD without vein resection at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed. LPD was introduced by initially focusing on laparoscopic resection followed by open reconstruction (hybrid) for 18 months prior to attempting a totally LPD (TLPD) approach. Cases were compared with Chi square, Fisher's exact test, and Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS

Between March 2010 and June 2013, 140 PDs were completed at our institution, of which 56 (40 %) were attempted laparoscopically. In 31/56 procedures we planned to perform only the resection laparoscopically (hybrid), of which 7 (23 %) required premature conversion before completion of resection. Following the first 23 of these hybrid cases, a total of 25 TLPDs have been performed, of which there were no conversions to open. For all LPD, a significant reduction in operative times was identified following the first 10 patients (median 478.5 vs. 430.5 min; p = 0.01), approaching open PD levels. After approximately 50 cases, operative times and estimated blood loss were consistently lower than those for open PD.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience of building an LPD program, the initial ten cases represent the biggest hurdle with respect to operative times. For an experienced teaching center using a staged and team-based approach, LPD appears to offer meaningful reductions in operative time and blood loss within the first 50 cases.

Laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original review, published in Issue 1, 2011, of The Cochrane Library. Acute lower abdominal pain is common, and making a diagnosis is particularly challenging in premenopausal women, as ovulation and menstruation symptoms overlap with symptoms of appendicitis, early pregnancy complications and pelvic infection. A management strategy involving early laparoscopy could potentially provide a more accurate diagnosis, earlier treatment and reduced risk of complications.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and harms of laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age.

SEARCH METHODS

The Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and CINAHL were searched (October 2013). The International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) was also searched. No new studies were included in this updated version.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included women of childbearing age who presented with acute lower abdominal pain, non-specific lower abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis were included. Trials were included if they evaluated laparoscopy with open appendicectomy, or laparoscopy with a wait and see strategy. Study selection was carried out by two review authors independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently extracted by two review authors and the risk of bias assessed. We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. A summary of findings table was prepared using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 12 studies including 1020 participants were incorporated into the review. These studies had low to moderate risk of bias, mainly because allocation concealment or methods of sequence generation were not adequately reported. In addition, it was not clear whether follow-up was similar for the treatment groups. The index test was incorporated as a reference standard in the laparoscopy group, and differential verification or partial verification bias may have occurred in most RCTs. Overall the quality of the evidence was low to moderate for most outcomes, as per the GRADE approach.Laparoscopy was compared with open appendicectomy in eight RCTs. Laparoscopy was associated with an increased rate of specific diagnoses (seven RCTs, 561 participants; odds ratio (OR) 4.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.50 to 6.71; I(2) = 18%), but no evidence was found of reduced rates for any adverse events (eight RCTs, 623 participants; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.10; I(2) = 0%). A meta-analysis of seven studies found a significant difference favouring the laparoscopic procedure in the rate of removal of normal appendix (seven RCTs, 475 participants; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.24; I(2) = 0%).Laparoscopic diagnosis versus a 'wait and see' strategy was investigated in four RCTs. A significant difference favoured laparoscopy in terms of rate of specific diagnoses (four RCTs, 395 participants; OR 6.07, 95% CI 1.85 to 29.88; I(2) = 79%), but no evidence suggested a difference in rates of adverse events (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.67; I(2) = 0%).  

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that laparoscopy in women with acute lower abdominal pain, non-specific lower abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis led to a higher rate of specific diagnoses being made and a lower rate of removal of normal appendices compared with open appendicectomy only. Hospital stays were shorter. No evidence showed an increase in adverse events when any of these strategies were used.

[Laparoscopic appendicectomy in 2013--a barely tolerated procedure turning into a gold standard operation?]

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the first developed minimally invasive surgical procedures, nevertheless its judgement is contradictory up to the present day as far as its advantages and indications are concerned.

METHODS

The authors of this article give an overview and analyse the relevant literature concerning laparoscopic appendectomy and the data of patients on whom appendectomy was performed from 01/01/2005 to 30/09/2013 with laparoscopic and open technique.

RESULTS

At the Surgical Department of the Uzsoki Hospital 1214 patients had appendectomy because of acute appendicitis from 01/01/2005 to 30/09/2013. The applied surgical procedure was laparoscopy with 1065 patients (87.73%) and the open technique with 149 patients (12.27%). Since January 2006 our main principle has been that in case of appendicitis the primary technique to be applied is laparoscopic appendectomy. We were forced to conversion with 16.5% of patients and as the operational experience of the department grows, the proportion of conversions tends to decrease.

CONCLUSION

The advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy as opposed to open surgery have become obvious in the past decade, and the procedure may be recommended for all age groups. In case acute appendicitis is suspected the primary procedure to be applied in our department is the laparoscopic operation, the results of which are at least as good as that of open appendectomy. The routine application of laparoscopic appendectomy provides an excellent basis for the acquisition of advanced laparoscopic surgery thus appendectomy will not lose its training character due to the laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic interval appendectomy versus open interval appendectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial

This was a prospective randomized controlled study designed to compare laparoscopic and open interval appendectomy and involved 100 patients of appendicular phlegmon. After initial conservative management, patients were divided into 2 groups of 50 each and interval appendectomy was performed by laparoscopy in one of the groups and by open method in the other. Mean operative time in open surgery was 33.9 minutes and that in laparoscopic surgery was 57.64 minutes (P < 0.05). Concomitant pathology was observed in 16% and 2% of patients in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively. Mean pain scores on the first postoperative day were 5.14 in the laparoscopic group and 6.01 in the open group (P < 0.05). Patients in the laparoscopic group had a shorter duration of ileus, postoperative stay, and returned to work earlier (P < 0.05). We conclude that laparoscopy offers a number of advantages over open interval appendectomy.

Short-term Outcome of Open Appendectomy in Southern Iran: A Single Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the short-term outcome of open appendectomy, the rate of negative appendectomy as well as pathology reports after surgery in patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study being performed in Nemazee hospital affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Science during a 2-year period between 2008 and 2010. The medical records of all consecutive patients who underwent open appendectomy in our center due to acute appendicitis were included in the study. The elective and laparoscopic appendectomies were excluded. The demographic information, clinical findings, laboratory investigations and the histopathological examination of the appendix were recorded and reported.

RESULTS

A total of 337 patient including 137 (36.4%) females, and 240 (63.6%) males with the mean age of 16.26 ± 9.81 (range 3 to 76) years were stduied. Anorexia (64.7%) and fever (20.7%) were more prevalent symptoms. The mean duration between pain initiation and operation ranged from 0 to 14 days with mean 1.88 ± 1.63 days. Right lower quadrant (RLQ), periumbilical, epigastria, left lower quadrant (LLQ), and Right upper quadrant (RUQ), pain were manifest in 78.8%, 41.6%, 12.2%, 3.2%, and    1.3% of patients, respectively. Pathological evaluation of the appendix showed appendicitis in 70.4% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The higher rate of negative appendectomy accounts for wasteful tapping of medical resources and causing further complication in patients. Therefore it is essential to conduct more accurate studies to detect the root cause of the disease. This would help improve the management of appendicitis which is an emergency condition with high incidence.

A descriptive cost analysis study of cases of right iliac fossa pain

Patients with suspected appendicitis comprise a large proportion of general surgical workload. The resulting healthcare burden is significant when one considers that investigations, observation and surgical procedures are often needed. As no previous study has examined the cost of managing patients with suspected appendicitis, we performed a cost analysis study of management of cases of right iliac fossa (RIF) pain in University Hospital Limerick. Patients who were admitted with right iliac fossa pain from 1st April 2011 to 4th May 2011 were identified prospectively. After discharge, patients' medical records were reviewed. Costing data collected comprised details on length of stay, number and type of radiological investigations, number and type of blood investigations, medications administered and operations performed. Costs for radiological investigations were obtained from casemix data. Blood investigation costs were obtained from relevant laboratories. Medication costs were obtained from the pharmacy department. Operation costs were based on the cost of equipment combined with cost relating to operating theatre time and recovery unit time. Due to unavailability of data on Irish public hospital bed-day cost, a private hospital provided cost details on this aspect. 94 patients (M = 33, F = 61) were admitted with RIF pain during this time period. 62 underwent surgery. There were 53 appendicectomies performed with 42 (79%) positive for appendicitis on histological analysis. Blood test, radiology, pharmacy, operative and bed-day costs were €1857, €6252, €3517, €184,191 and €152,706 respectively. The total estimated cost was €348,525 (€3708 average per patient). There is a high cost associated with managing suspected appendicitis in Ireland. Strategies to reduce cost include reducing unnecessary admissions and unnecessary operations. Reducing LOS may be another potentially valuable cost saving method. It is imperative that resources are channelled into the provision of accurate costing structures.

Intra-abdominal collections following laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: an experience of 516 consecutive cases at a district general hospital

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to evaluate the incidence of intra-abdominal collections (IACs) in all patients undergoing laparoscopic (LA) and open appendicectomy (OA) from April 2009 to October 2011 in a district general hospital with expertise in minimally invasive surgery (MIS).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients undergoing appendicectomy in the specified time period was carried out. IACs were identified from various in-hospital data resources. Severity of appendicitis was assessed from histology reports.

RESULTS

516 patients were identified, of whom 242 (47 %) underwent OA and 274 (53 %) LA. Twenty-six (5 %) patients were found to have IACs postoperatively. Fifteen (5.5 %) IACs were identified in the laparoscopic group and 11 (4.5 %) in the open group. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of developing IACs in open versus laparoscopic groups [odds ratio (OR) 1.22, confidence interval (CI) 0.55-2.70, P = 0.63]. Patients were twelve times more likely to develop IACs with an appendix identified as being necrotic or perforated on histology (OR 12.24, CI 5.29-28.32, P < 0.0001). There was a trend towards shorter total hospital stay in the LA (3.58 days, CI 3.0-4.1 days) compared with OA (4.31 days, CI 3.7-4.9 days, P = 0.082) group, although this was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased rates of IAC following LA have been identified in some studies. Our series shows that, in a centre with adequate MIS experience, the IAC rate following LA is comparable to that of the open approach and should not deter surgeons with adequate support and resources.

Laparoscopic partial hepatectomy of focal nodular hyperplasia

Focal nodular hyperplasia is a benign liver lesion incidentally discovered with increasing frequency because of the proliferation of imaging studies. Radiographic characterization can diagnose this pathologic lesion and nonoperative therapy is the standard of care. However, surgical resection may be required for diagnostic reasons or symptomatic patients. Depending on the anatomic location of the lesion, biopsy and/or resection can be performed laparoscopically. We herein report the case of a 26-year-old Japanese woman with a hepatic tumor who required a medical examination. Her medical history was negative for alcohol abuse, oral contraceptive administration and trauma. Clinical examination showed no significant symptoms. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging showed a mass located in the left lateral segment of the liver with a diameter of about 40 mm. It was difficult to diagnose the tumor definitively from these imaging studies, so we performed laparoscopic partial hepatectomy with successive firing of endoscopic staplers. The histopathological diagnosis was focal nodular hyperplasia. Surgical procedures and postoperative course were uneventful and the patient was discharged from the hospital on postoperative day 5.

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

PURPOSE

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for relevant papers published between January 1990 and February 2012. We analyzed 22 outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis.

RESULTS

We identified 39 papers reporting results from randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for acute appendicitis. Our meta-analysis included 5,896 patients with acute appendicitis; 2,847 had undergone laparoscopic surgery, and 3,049 had undergone open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with longer operative time (by 13.12 min). However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis was associated with earlier resumption of liquid and solid intake; shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay; a reduction in dose numbers of parenteral and oral analgesics; earlier return to normal activity, work, and normal life; decreased occurrence of wound infection; a better cosmesis; and similar hospital charges.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery may now be the standard treatment for acute appendicitis.

Predictive value of alpha-fetoprotein in the long-term risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis B virus infection--results from a clinic-based longitudinal cohort

BACKGROUND

Although serum level of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) has long been used to complement imaging tests in the screening and diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), whether it can be used as a predictive marker of long-term risk for developing HCC in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) has not been extensively evaluated and thus remains controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively conducted a clinic-based longitudinal cohort study including 617 Korean American patients with HBV who had been followed for up to 22 years (median follow-up time, 6.2 years) to evaluate the association between baseline serum AFP level and the long-term risk of HCC.

RESULTS

The median baseline AFP value of these patients was 3.8 ng/ml. Compared to patients with lower-than-median AFP value, those with higher-than-median baseline serum AFP had a significantly increased risk of developing HCC with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-5.99), independent of other major HCC risk factors. In addition, we calculated the cumulative incidence of HCC during different years of follow-up time by baseline serum AFP, and found that the cumulative incidence of HCC was significantly higher in HBV patients with high baseline serum AFP compared to those with low baseline serum AFP in each of the five follow-up time periods examined.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicated that AFP was a strong independent prospective predictor of long-term HCC risk in high-risk HBV patients. More targeted prevention and early detection of HCC may be considered for these patients.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis

Laparoscopic appendectomy is the widely accepted treatment for acute appendicitis. This approach offers the potential of less pain, shorter hospital stay, and quicker return to activities. Traditionally, patients are hospitalized for 24 hours after laparoscopic appendectomy. This practice can be questioned due to the good results of other outpatient laparoscopic surgery. A retrospective review of 119 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis was undertaken from January through September 2009; outpatient and in-patient laparoscopic appendectomies were compared. Patients were selected for outpatient management based upon physician discretion and their clinical course in operation and recovery rooms. Forty-two patients were dismissed on the day of surgery and 77 were admitted for 1 to 5 days postoperatively. No significant differences in age, gender, and preoperative comorbidities between outpatient and inpatient groups were found. Postoperative complications occurred in 2.4 per cent of outpatients and 11.7 per cent of inpatients ( P = 0.16). Complications included superficial wound infections, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, intra-abdominal bleeding, pneumonia, and infected hematoma. Based upon this study, outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely in selected patients. This study provides the background for the present prospective protocol for routine outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy at our institution.

A Clinical Comparison of Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy for Complicated Appendicitis

Purpose

Although laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) are performed universally, a controversy still exists whether the LA is an appropriate surgical approach to complicated appendicitis (CA). We retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomies for CA.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 60 consecutive patients who were diagnosed as having CA from July 2009 to January 2011. Outcomes such as operative time, time to soft diet, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were analyzed.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in operative time between the LA and the open appendectomy (OA) groups. Return to soft diet was faster in the LA group (2.1 ± 1.2 vs. 3.5 ± 1.5 days; P = 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter for the LA group (4.4 ± 2.3 vs. 5.8 ± 2.9 days; P = 0.045). The overall complication rates showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups. In cases involving a periappendiceal abscess, the LA had a significantly higher incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) and postoperative ileus (PI; P = 0.028).

Conclusion

The LA showed good results in terms of the time to soft diet, the length of hospital stay, and surgical site infection (SSI) whereas the overall complication rates were similar for the two groups. However, the LA was associated with significantly higher incidence of IAA and PI for the cases with a periappendiceal abscess. Therefore, when using a LA, the surgeon must take great care to minimize the incidence of IAA and PI if a periappendiceal abscess is present.

Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for immune function in patients with colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the immune function in patients with colorectal cancer after laparoscopic surgery (LS) and conventional open surgery (OS).

METHODS

PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the immunological difference between LS and OS were included. Two authors extracted data and assessed trial quality.

RESULTS

Eleven studies including 695 patients were analysed. Immune-competent cells demonstrated no significant differences between LS and OS in six trials. Eight trials assessed various perioperative plasma cytokine concentrations with no significant differences in interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels between LS and OS. However, meta-analysis showed higher T suppressor lymphocytes (CD8+) counts on postoperative days (POD) 1-3 and lower plasma levels of CRP on POD 0-1 in LS group compared with OS group.

CONCLUSION

Although LS groups displayed higher T suppressor lymphocyte (CD8+) counts on postoperative days (POD) 1-3 and lower plasma levels of CRP on POD 0-1, there is no sufficient evidence to support superior preservation of global immune function with LS compared to OS.