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

Factors affecting the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy: A single center study

AIM

This study aimed to explore factors may affect the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

The data of 636 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between July 2016 and July 2019 in Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into group A (hospital stay ≤3 days, 348 patients) and group B (hospital stay >3 days, 288 patients) according to their hospital stay.Sex, age, disease onset time(time from onset to admission), nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, peritonitis, comorbidities, and history of appendicitis; preoperative body temperature (T), white blood cell (WBC) count, percentage of neutrophilic granulocytes, and preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) level; time from diagnosis to surgery. appendix diameter, appendicolith, and ascites in ultrasound or CT; surgical time(the surgery start time was the time of skin incision, and the end time was the time the anesthesia intubation was removed), intraoperative blood loss (the volume of blood infiltrating into a gauze was calculated by weighing the gauze infiltrated with water and calculating the volume of water), intraoperative adhesions or effusions, and stump closure methods, convert to open appendectomy, appendix pathology(perforated or gangrenous appendicitis were defined as complicated appendicitis and simple or suppurative appendicitis were defined as uncomplicated appendicitis) and antibiotic treatment schemes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were detected between group A and group B in age (37.10 ± 13.52y vs 42.94 ± 15.57y, P<0.01), disease onset time (21.36 ± 16.56 h vs 32.52 ± 27.99 h, P <0.01), time from diagnosis to surgery (8.63 ± 7.29 h vs 10.70 ± 8.47 h, P<0.01); surgical time(64.09 ± 17.24 min vs 86.19 ± 39.96 min, P < 0.01); peritonitis(52.9% vs 74%, P < 0.01), comorbidities (12.4% vs 20.5%, P < 0.01), appendicolith (27.6% vs 41.7%, P < 0.01), ascites before the surgery(13.8% vs 22.9%, P < 0.01), intraoperative adhesions or effusions(56% vs 80.2%, P < 0.01); preoperative temperature (37.11 ± 0.64°C vs 37.54 ± 0.90°C, P < 0.01); preoperative WBC count (13.06 ± 3.39 × 109/L vs 14.21 ± 4.54 × 109/L, P = 0.04);preoperative CRP level(18.99 ± 31.72 mg/L vs 32.46 ± 46.68 mg/L, P < 0.01); appendix diameter(10.22 ± 2.59 mm vs 11.26 ± 3.23 mm, P < 0.01); intraoperative blood loss (9.36 ± 7.29 mL vs 13.74 ± 13.49 mL, P < 0.01); using Hem-o-lok for stump closure(30.7% vs 38.5%, P = 0.04); complicated appendicitis (9.5% vs 45.8%, P < 0.01); and using ertapenem for antibiotic treatment after the surgery(4.3% vs 21.5%, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age (OR = 1.021; 95%CI = 1.007-1.036), peritonitis (OR = 1.603; 95% CI = 1.062-2.419), preoperative WBC count (OR = 1.084; 95% CI = 1.025-1.046), preoperative CRP level (OR = 1.010; 95% CI = 1.005-1.015), time from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.043; 95% CI = 1.015-1.072), appendicolith (OR = 1.852; 95% CI = 1.222-2.807), complicated appendicitis (OR = 3.536; 95% CI = 2.132-5.863), surgical time (OR = 1.025; 95% CI = 1.016-1.034), use of Hem-o-lok for stump closure (OR = 1.894; 95% CI = 1.257-2.852), and use of ertapenem for antibiotic treatment (OR = 3.076; 95% CI = 1.483-6.378) were the risk factors for a prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient with appendicitis was older and had peritonitis, higher preoperative WBC count or CRP level, longer time from diagnosis to surgery, appendicolith, and complicated appendicitis, predicting a prolonged hospital stay. Shorter surgical time and the use of silk ligation for stump closure and cephalosporins + metronidazole for antibiotic treatment might be better choices to obtain a shorter hospital stay.

Comparison of open appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy with laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting and glove endobag techniques: A prospective observational study

Objective

Despite the recent increase in the use of laparoscopic appendectomy procedures to treat acute appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy is not necessarily the best treatment modality. The aim of this study is to examine the value of laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting and glove endobag in terms of various parameters and in terms of reducing the costs related to laparoscopic appendectomy procedures.

Material and Methods

Seventy-two acute appendicitis patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and open appendectomy surgery were enrolled in the study and were evaluated prospectively. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 was treated with laparoscopic appendectomy using laparoscopic intracorpreal knotting and glove endobag (n=36) and group 2 was treated with open appendectomy (n=36). The two groups were statistically compared in terms of preoperative symptoms and signs, laboratory and imaging findings, operation time and technique, pain score, gas and stool outputs, duration of hospital stay, return to normal activity, and complications.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in relation to gender, age, body mass index, or pre-operation findings, which included loss of appetite, vomiting, time when pain started, displacement of pain, defense, rebound, imaging methods, and laboratory and pathology examinations (p>0.05). Moreover, there were no differences between the groups with respect to drain usage, hospital stay time, or complications (p>0.05). In contrast, a statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of operation time, pain scores, gas-stool outputs, and return to normal activity in the laparoscopic appendectomy group (p=0.001).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed in a facile, safe, and cost-effective manner with laparoscopic intracorporeal knotting and glove endobag. By using these techniques, the use of expensive instruments can be avoided when performing laparoscopic appendectomy.

Predictive Factors to Distinguish Between Patients With Noncomplicated Appendicitis and Those With Complicated Appendicitis

Purpose

Recently, randomized controlled trials have reported that conservative therapy can be a treatment option in patients with noncomplicated appendicitis. However, preoperative diagnosis of noncomplicated appendicitis is difficult. In this study, we determined predictive factors to distinguish patients with noncomplicated appendicitis from those with complicated appendicitis.

Methods

A total of 351 patients who underwent surgical treatment for acute appendicitis from January 2011 to December 2012 were included in this study. We classified patients into noncomplicated or complicated appendicitis groups based on the findings of abdominal computed tomography and pathology. We performed a retrospective analysis to find factors that could be used to discriminate between noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis.

Results

The mean age of the patients in the complicated appendicitis group (54.5 years) was higher than that of the patients in the noncomplicated appendicitis group (40.2 years) (P < 0.001), but the male-to-female ratios were similar. In the univariate analysis, the appendicocecal junction's diameter, appendiceal maximal diameter, appendiceal wall enhancement, periappendiceal fat infiltration, ascites, abscesses, neutrophil proportion, C-reactive protein (CRP), aspartate aminotransferase, and total bilirubin were statistically significant factors. However, in the multivariate analysis, the appendiceal maximal diameter (P = 0.018; odds ratio [OR], 1.129), periappendiceal fat infiltration (P = 0.025; OR, 5.778), ascites (P = 0.038; OR, 2.902), and CRP (P < 0.001; OR, 1.368) were statistically significant.

Conclusion

Several factors can be used to distinguish between noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Using these factors, we could more accurately distinguish patients with noncomplicated appendicitis from those with complicated appendicitis.