11 research outputs found
Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy - a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although laparoscopic surgery has been available for a long time and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been performed universally, it is still not clear whether open appendectomy (OA) or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the most appropriate surgical approach to acute appendicitis. The purpose of this work is to compare the therapeutic effects and safety of laparoscopic and conventional "open" appendectomy by means of a meta-analysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A meta-analysis was performed of all randomized controlled trials published in English that compared LA and OA in adults and children between 1990 and 2009. Calculations were made of the effect sizes of: operating time, postoperative length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, resumption of diet, complications rates, and conversion to open surgery. The effect sizes were then pooled by a fixed or random-effects model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Forty-four randomized controlled trials with 5292 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Operating time was 12.35 min longer for LA (95% CI: 7.99 to 16.72, p < 0.00001). Hospital stay after LA was 0.60 days shorter (95% CI: -0.85 to -0.36, p < 0.00001). Patients returned to their normal activity 4.52 days earlier after LA (95% CI: -5.95 to -3.10, p < 0.00001), and resumed their diet 0.34 days earlier(95% CI: -0.46 to -0.21, p < 0.00001). Pain after LA on the first postoperative day was significantly less (p = 0.008). The overall conversion rate from LA to OA was 9.51%. With regard to the rate of complications, wound infection after LA was definitely reduced (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.59, p < 0.00001), while postoperative ileus was not significantly reduced(OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.47, p = 0.71). However, intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), intraoperative bleeding and urinary tract infection (UIT) after LA, occurred slightly more frequently(OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.43, p = 0.05; OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.54 to 4.48, p = 0.41; OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.58 to 5.29, p = 0.32).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>LA provides considerable benefits over OA, including a shorter length of hospital stay, less postoperative pain, earlier postoperative recovery, and a lower complication rate. Furthermore, over the study period it was obvious that there had been a trend toward fewer differences in operating time for the two procedures. Although LA was associated with a slight increase in the incidence of IAA, intraoperative bleeding and UIT, it is a safe procedure. It may be that the widespread use of LA is due to its better therapeutic effect.</p
A new right groin incision versus McBurney’s incision for open appendectomy: a randomized controlled trial
Single-incision videolaparoscopic appendectomy with conventional videolaparoscopy equipment
Background : Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in daily practice, and is approached laparoscopically in many centers. Efforts have been undertaken for the development of minimally invasive techniques that reduce tissue trauma and offer improved cosmetic results, one of such being the single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS). Aim : To present a minimally invasive technique for appendectomy (SILS) undertaken with conventional instruments. Method : Eleven patients were treated in the emergency care center presenting abdominal pain in the right iliac fossa that was suggestive of appendicitis. Diagnostic investigation was subsequently conducted, including physical examination, laboratory and imaging exams (CT scan with intravenous contrast or total abdominal ultrasound), and the results were consistent with acute appendicitis. Thus, after consent, these patients underwent SILS appendectomy under general anesthesia with three trocars (two 10 mm and one 5 mm), using conventional and optical laparoscopic tweezers (10 mm, 30º). The base and pedicle of the appendix were ligated with titanium LT 400 clips. The procedure occurred uneventfully. Inclusion criteria were absence of diffuse peritonitis, BMI (body mass index) less than 35 and absence of serious comorbidities or sepsis. Results : Seven men and four women were operated with average age of 25.7 years and underwent appendectomy through this technique. Mean procedure duration was of 37.2 min. Regarding surgical findings, three had appendicitis in stage 1, four in stage 2 and four in stage 3. All patients improved well, without surgical complications, and did not require conversion to open surgery or conventional laparoscopy technique. Conclusion : Appendectomy conducted through Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery is a feasible and promising technique that can be performed with conventional laparoscopic instruments
