Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted "one-trocar" appendectomy -- TULAA -- as an alternative operation method in the treatment of appendicitis

INTRODUCTION: Appendectomy is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in general surgery and laparoscopic appendectomy represents the beginning of minimal invasive era in visceral surgery. But until yet, laparoscopic appendectomy is not the standard method for removal of the appendix and the discussion about the value and the advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy is still going on between the opponents and advocates of this method. In this article we present the transumbilical laparoscopic assisted "one-trocar" appendectomy (TULAA) as an alternative procedure for appendectomy and our experiences with this technique, which is up to now not very well known in Germany. METHOD: From November 1, 2000 to December 31, 2002, we performed appendectomy in 350 patients. 163 patients (46.6 %) underwent TULAA in the technique of Begin. All of them were examined two weeks and three months after surgery. RESULTS: In 94.5 % the "one-trocar" appendectomy was successful and there were no intraoperative complications. The mortality was 0 %. Conversion to the open procedure was necessary in 3 patients (1.8 %), respectively introduction of accessory trocars was necessary in 6 patients (3.7 %). In 111 from 163 patients (68.1 %) appendectomy was performed because of acute appendicitis. In 14.1 % we detected additional secondary findings during the laparoscopy. The postoperative complication rate was 3.6 %. CONCLUSION: The transumbilical laparoscopic assisted "one-trocar" appendectomy complements the minimal invasive procedures in visceral surgery. The operating technique combines the simplicity and the safety of conventional appendectomy with the survey of laparoscopic appendectomy. It minimizes the trauma of surgery and shows a perfect cosmetic result.     

Trends in utilization and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy

BACKGROUND: Although a number of trials have analyzed the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy, the clinical advantages, and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic appendectomy in the management of acute and perforated appendicitis are still not clearly defined. The aim of this study was to examine utilization and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy using a national administrative database of academic medical centers and teaching hospitals. METHODS: Using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes, we obtained data from the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Data Base for all patients who underwent appendectomy for acute and perforated appendicitis between 1999 and 2003 (n = 60,236). Trends in utilization of laparoscopic appendectomy were examined over the 5-year period. The outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy were compared including length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission, complications, observed and expected (risk-adjusted) in-hospital mortality, and costs. RESULTS: Overall, 41,085 patients underwent open appendectomy and 19,151 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. The percentage of appendectomy performed by laparoscopy increased from 20% in 1999 to 43% in 2003 (P <0.01). Compared with patients who underwent open appendectomy, patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were more likely female, more likely white, had a lower severity of illness, and were less likely to have perforated appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (2.5 days vs 3.4 days), lower rate of 30-day readmission (1.0% vs 1.3%), and lower rate of overall complications (6.1% vs 9.6%). There was no significant difference in the observed to expected mortality ratio between laparoscopic and open appendectomy (0.5 vs 0.6, respectively). The mean cost per case was similar between the two groups (US$ 6,242 vs US$ 6,260). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of laparoscopic appendectomy at academic centers has increased more than two-fold between 1999 and 2003. Patients selected for laparoscopic appendectomy have less advanced appendicitis and have a shorter length of stay and fewer complications without increasing the inpatient care cost.     

Insurance status and race represent independent predictors of undergoing laparoscopic surgery for appendicitis: secondary data analysis of 145,546 patients

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that racial and socioeconomic differences lead to inequality in access to health care. It is unknown whether insurance status and race affect the choice of surgical treatment for patients presenting with appendicitis. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with primary ICD-9 procedure codes for laparoscopic and open appendectomy were selected from the 1998, 1999, and 2000 Nationwide (US) Inpatient Samples. The primary predictor variables were insurance status (private, Medicare, Medicaid, other) and race (Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, other). Multiple logistic regression models were used to assess whether insurance status and race are associated with the choice of surgical procedure for patients presenting with appendicitis. RESULTS: Discharge abstracts of 145,546 patients were used for our analyses. There were 32,407 patients (22.3%) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and 113,139 patients (77.7%) who had open appendectomy. Although 24.2% of privately insured patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, only 16.9% of Medicare patients, 17.4% of Medicaid patients, and 19.6% of patients in the "other" insurance category were treated using the laparoscopic procedure (p < 0.001). Caucasian patients underwent laparoscopic surgery in 24.8%, African Americans in 18.6%, Hispanics in 19.6%, and other ethnicities in 18.8% of patients (p < 0.001). Compared with the Medicaid subset, and after adjusting for potential confounders such as age, gender, race, patient comorbidity, median ZIP code income, hospital location and teaching status, and presence of abscess or perforation, privately insured patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.26, 95% [CI [1.20, 1.33], p < 0.001) and Medicare patients (OR = 1.17, 95% CI [1.05, 1.30], p = 0.004) were significantly more likely to undergo laparoscopic surgery. Caucasian patients (OR = 1.42, 95% CI [1.33, 1.51], p < 0.001) and Hispanics (OR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.04, 1.20], p = 0.002) were significantly more likely to have laparoscopic appendectomy, compared with African Americans, even after adjusting for the previously mentioned confounders and insurance status. CONCLUSIONS: Even after adjusting for potential confounders, insurance status and race are marked independent predictors of having laparoscopic surgery in patients treated for appendicitis in this sample.     

Institutioning a clinical practice guideline to decrease the rate of normal appendectomies

With the advent of laparoscopic appendectomy, the rate of normal appendectomies increased at our institution. To decrease our rate of normal appendectomies, we instituted a clinical practice guideline in January 1999 for the preoperative evaluation and treatment of patients with possible acute appendicitis. The medical records of 464 consecutive patients who underwent either open or laparoscopic appendectomy with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2000, were reviewed. The decision of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy was made at the time of surgery by the attending surgeon. Two hundred twelve patients (116 females, 96 males) underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (142 open, 70 laparoscopic) from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1998, prior to the institution of the guideline. Two hundred fifty-two patients (117 females, 135 males) underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (193 open, 59 laparoscopic) from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2000 (after the guideline was instituted). Prior to the guideline, the normal appendectomy rate was 21.7 per cent (18.3% open, 28.6% laparoscopic). After the guideline was instituted, the normal appendectomy rate was 16.7 per cent (14.5% open, 23.7% laparoscopic). In females, the normal appendectomy rate prior to the guideline was 31.0 per cent (26.6% open, 36.5% laparoscopic) while the normal appendectomy rate after the guideline was 23.1 per cent (19.0% open, 31.6% laparoscopic), P = 0.172. In males, the normal appendectomy rate prior to the guideline was 10.4 per cent (11.5% open, 5.6% laparoscopic) while the normal appendectomy rate after the guideline was 11.1 per cent (11.4% open, 9.5% laparoscopic), P = 0.861. By instituting a guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of possible acute appendicitis, we were able to decrease our rate of normal appendectomies. Although statistical significance was not reached, there is a trend toward decreasing the rate of normal appendectomies in females after the guideline was instituted.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术51例报告

目的:探讨基层医院行经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术的可行性,并总结手术经验.方法:回顾分析51例经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术的手术经验及临床资料.结果:48例成功施行经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术,手术时间30～90 min,术后无出血、粪漏等并发症发生,恢复良好,治疗及美容效果满意.1例因阑尾根部坏疽穿孔中转开腹,2例因放置引流管增...     

Laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnancy

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of an acute abdomen in pregnancy. However, due to the potential fetal risk associated with the CO2-pneumoperitoneum and various operative technical reasons there is still controversy about the role of laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnant women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and November 2005, 283 women between 17 and 45 years with suspected appendicitis underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at our institution. Fifteen of these patients (5.3 %) were pregnant at the time of surgery (mean age, 28 years; range, 18-40 years; mean gestational age, 21.9 weeks; range, 14-34 weeks). Perioperative obstetric monitoring included fetal ultrasound, including Doppler sonography and cardiotocography. Clinical data were collected prospectively. Complete follow-up data were available in 14 patients. RESULTS: All 15 patients underwent successful laparoscopic appendectomy. Mean operation time was 53 minutes (range, 30-100 minutes). The histologic appendicitis / appendectomy ratio was 73 %. One patient showed a postoperative pyelonephritis, another a cystitis. Average length of hospital stay was 5.5 days (range, 3-10 days). All fourteen pregnancies with complete follow-up resulted in delivery of healthy infants. The mean gestational age at delivery was 39.6 weeks (range, 35-42 weeks). Two patients (14.3 %) had a preterm delivery at 35 weeks with uncomplicated outcome. One patient underwent caesarean section at 41 weeks after chorioamnionitis. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe and effective method to treat acute appendicitis in pregnant women regardless of the trimester. For the best outcome the operation should be performed in a center where surgeons, perinatologist, obstetricians and anesthesiologists work together as a part of an interdisciplinary team.     

Laparoscopic surgery for common surgical emergencies: A population-based study

Background: Despite being controversial in the past, many reports on the safe use of laparoscopic surgery in emergency settings have been published. The aim of this study was to investigate the diffusion of laparoscopic surgery in three common surgical emergency operations, namely, appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and simple repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), in a stable population.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the central database of the Hospital Authority (HA) in Hong Kong. Data for patients managed in 14 HA hospitals from 1998 to 2002 were studied. The operation record and discharge record of each patient were also investigated to verify the data.Results: A total of 12,708 patients underwent appendectomy, 2631 patients underwent cholecystectomy, and 2260 patients had simple repair of PPU performed. During the study period, 37.2% of appendectomies, 46.5% of cholecystectomies, and 23.1% of simple repairs of PPU were performed laparoscopically. More than a two-fold increase in the proportion of laparoscopic surgery was observed in each of these three operations. By the end of 2002, the percentage of laparoscopic surgery had increased to 53.5% for appendectomies, 61.3% for cholecystectomies, and 32.9% for simple repairs of PPU. Significantly lower hospital mortality rates and shorter postoperative hospital stay were consistenty observed in patients with laparoscopic surgery of the three emergencies. A wide variation in the use of laparoscopic surgery, ranging from 3.7% to 73.1%, was observed among the 14 HA hospitals. However, there was no correlation in the use of laparoscopic surgery with the volume of operation performed in each hospital (p = 0.933).Conclusion: A high diffusion rate on the use of laparoscopic surgery for common surgical emergency was observed in Hong Kong. However, there was also a wide variation in the diffusion rate among the 14 HA hospitals. Efforts to reduce hospital variation for the better dissemination of safe laparoscopic technique may be warranted.     

The suprapubic approach for laparoscopic appendectomy

BACKGROUND: Because it produces superior cosmetic results, patients prefer laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy. We developed two alternative laparoscopic routes of access to the abdominal cavity for appendectomy that use suprapubic incisions placed below the line of pubic hair. We then compared the results for these three different modes of access. METHODS: Operative characteristics, morbidity, outcome, and patient preference regarding three different approaches to laparoscopic appendectomy were compared in a retrospective study. In addition, a group of 24 healthy women were surveyed by questionnaire about their preferred technique and expected cosmetic results. RESULTS: Between January 1997 and August 2000, 149 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and were assigned to undergo one of the three techniques. Operative results, morbidity, and hospital stay were similar. Twenty-five percent of patients submitted to technique 1 (no suprapubic trocars) were satisfied with their method, vs 54% of patients with technique 2 (one suprapubic port, angled working trocars) and 100% of patients with technique 3 (two suprapubic parallel trocars). Almost all patients (92% of those who had technique 1 and 100% of those who had techniques 2 and 3) chose the standard laparoscopic access as the cosmetically least attractive method. All of the healthy controls we interviewed preferred technique 3. CONCLUSION: The placement of suprapubic trocars improves the surgeon's working position during laparoscopic appendectomy. A laparoscopic approach using two suprapubic trocars yields the best cosmetic results in the opinion of the majority of patients and healthy interviewees.     

Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Cholecystectomy During Pregnancy: Six Case Reports

Background:

Pregnancy was once considered a contraindication to laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendectomy. The progression of laparoscopic techniques has resulted in a continued reassessment of laparoscopic procedures during pregnancy. There still exists some controversy as to the safety of laparoscopic procedures during pregnancy. This paper reviews our series of six pregnant patients treated laparoscopically for appendicitis and cholecystitis.

Methods:

Charts were reviewed of all pregnant patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy or appendectomy at St Clare''s Hospital Schenectady, New York between 1992 and 1996. Six patients were identified. Patients and obstetricians were contacted to investigate the results of the pregnancy.

Results:

All patients and fetuses survived the procedure. Two patients delivered prematurely but remote from the operative procedure. All infants were healthy postpartum. One patient underwent an elective abortion as she had planned. The abortion was remote from the surgical procedure.

Conclusion:

Our series adds to the growing evidence that laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely during pregnancy.     

Day-care laparoscopic appendectomies.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the safety of laparoscopic appendectomy in a day-care setting and to compare patients selected for laparoscopic versus open appendectomy. DESIGN: A retrospective, nonrandomized study. SETTING: A community hospital in a small town in British Columbia. PATIENTS: Ninety-four consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. INTERVENTIONS: Each patient underwent laparoscopic or open appendectomy as selected by the operating surgeon. OUTCOME MEASURES: Duration of operation and of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The average operating time was 32 minutes for open appendectomy and 36 minutes for laparoscopic appendectomy. Two (4%) of the 52 patients who had a laparoscopic appendectomy had significant complications; 1 of them required reoperation for intra-abdominal abscess. Thirty-nine (75%) of the laparoscopic appendectomies were done as day-care procedures. The average length of stay for the remaining patients was 2.1 days. The overall complication rate for patients who underwent open appendectomy was 20%. The average length of stay for these patients was 3.2 days; no patient was discharged within 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed as a day-care procedure, even for selected patients with gangrenous or perforated appendices. Patients typically selected for open appendectomy include children and those with more advanced infection.     

Incidentally discovered intestinal nonrotation at time of bariatric surgery: Which operation to perform?

BackgroundAn incidental finding of intestinal nonrotation at the time of bariatric surgery poses the following 2 dilemmas: (1) which operation to perform, and (2) whether an appendectomy should be performed concurrently.ObjectivesTo review the experience of 2 Bariatric Centers of Excellence with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with intestinal nonrotation, and to perform a systematic review of the literature on this topic.SettingTwo Bariatric Centers of Excellence as designated by the Ontario Bariatric Network.MethodsA chart review of all LSG cases performed in patients with intestinal nonrotation at 2 centers was performed. A systematic review on performing bariatric surgery in patients with intestinal nonrotation/malrotation was conducted using EMBASE and MEDLINE databases.ResultsFour patients (.4% of all cases) underwent LSG in the setting of intestinal nonrotation. Two patients underwent a concurrent appendectomy. Three patients developed postoperative gastrointestinal reflux disease and 1 patient required conversion to a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. A total of 12 retrospective studies with 23 patients were included in the systematic review. Nineteen patients underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 3 patients underwent a duodenal switch, and 1 patient underwent LSG. Nine patients (41%) underwent a concurrent appendectomy. Reasons cited for not performing an appendectomy include not completely understanding the anatomic defect, being surprised by the discovery of nonrotation, no consent for the procedure, and suboptimal trocar placement for an appendectomy.ConclusionsLSG is a reasonable alternative to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in patients with intestinal nonrotation. A concurrent appendectomy may not be necessary in the era of modern cross-sectional imaging for diagnosing acute appendicitis.     

Value of Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Perforated Appendicitis

Background The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with perforated appendicitis. Methods This study involved a total of 73 consecutive patients who had undergone appendectomy for perforated appendicitis between January 1999 and December 2004. While 39 patients underwent open appendectomy (OA) during the first 3 years, the remaining 34 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) during the last 3 years. Results There was no case of LA converted to OA. No significant difference was found in the operating time between the two groups. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with less analgesic use, earlier oral intake restart (LA, 2.6 days; OA, 5.1 days), shorter median hospital stay (LA, 11.7 days; OA, 25.8 days), and lower rate of wound infections (LA, 8.8%; OA, 43.6%). Conclusions These results suggest that LA for perforated appendicitis is a safe procedure that may prove to have significant clinical advantages over conventional surgery.     

Use of laparoscopy in general surgical operations at academic centers

BackgroundLaparoscopy is commonly being used in many different types of general surgical procedures. The aim of the present study was to examine the use of laparoscopy and perioperative outcomes in 7 general surgical operations commonly performed at U.S. academic medical centers.MethodsThe clinical data of patients who underwent 1 of the 7 general surgical operations from 2008 to 2012 were obtained from the University HealthSystem Consortium database. The University HealthSystem Consortium database contains data from all major teaching hospitals in the United States. The 7 analyzed operations included only elective, inpatient procedures (except for appendectomy): open and laparoscopic antireflux surgery for gastroesophageal reflux, colectomy for colon cancer or diverticulitis, bariatric surgery for morbid obesity, ventral hernia repair for incisional hernia, appendectomy for acute appendicitis, rectal resection for rectal cancer, and cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis. The outcome measures included the number of procedures, rate of laparoscopy, rate of conversion to laparotomy, and in-hospital mortality.ResultsDuring the 3.5-year period, 53,958 patients underwent bariatric surgery, 13,918 patients underwent antireflux surgery, 8654 patients underwent appendectomy, 8512 patients underwent cholecystectomy, 29,934 patients underwent colectomy, 17,746 patients underwent ventral hernia repair, and 4729 patients underwent rectal resection. The present rate of laparoscopic use was 94.0% for bariatric surgery, 83.7% for antireflux surgery, 79.2% for appendectomy, 77.1% for cholecystectomy, 52.4% for colectomy, 28.1% for ventral hernia repair, and 18.3% for rectal resection. In-hospital mortality was greatest for colorectal resection (.38%–.58%). In-hospital mortality for bariatric surgery (.06%) was comparable to that for appendectomy (.01%), cholecystectomy (.27%), antireflux surgery (.15%), and ventral hernia repair (.20%). The rate of laparoscopic conversion to open surgery was lowest for bariatric surgery (.89%) and greatest for rectal resection (16.4%).ConclusionWithin the context of academic centers and elective, inpatient procedures, bariatric surgery had the greatest use of laparoscopy and the lowest rate of laparoscopic conversion to open surgery. The mortality for laparoscopic bariatric surgery is now comparable to that of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, appendectomy, and antireflux surgery.     

Laparoscopic interval appendectomy for periappendicular abscess

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy was first described in the early 1980s and is currently widely used for the treatment of acute appendicitis. The application of laparoscopic techniques to interval appendectomy and the value of this procedure as compared to open elective interval appendectomy remains uncertain. Therefore, we set out to assess the usefulness of interval laparoscopic appendectomy following periappendicular abscess. Methods: This study analyzes the data for 10 patients who underwent interval laparoscopic appendectomy 8–10 weeks following documented periappendicular abscess in the period between January 1996 and June 1998. Results: Laparoscopic appendectomy was completed successfully in all 10 patients. Nine patients were discharged 1 day after the operation; one patient was discharged on the evening of the operative day. There were no complications and no wound infections. Conclusion: We conclude that the laparoscopic approach is the preferable treatment for interval appendectomy. It is associated with minimal or no morbidity and a very short hospital stay. Received: 13 May 1999/Accepted: 9 December 1999/Online publication: 12 July 2000     

Laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnancy

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is a safe, effective, and beneficial procedure for the treatment of acute appendicitis. However, limited data are available regarding the safety and feasibility of LA during pregnancy. METHODS: Between January 2001 and August 2004, 1235 patients with clinically suspected appendicitis underwent laparoscopic surgery at our hospital. Eleven patients (0.9%) were pregnant women (mean age, 25 years; age range, 19-37 years; range of gestational age, 4-30 weeks). Clinical data collected retrospectively included demographic information; preoperative, procedural, and postoperative information; and outcome of the pregnancy. RESULTS: All 11 pregnant women underwent laparoscopic surgery without need of conversion. Ten patients underwent LA and were found to have acute appendicitis on histologic analysis. One patient had torsion of the right fallopian tube and a healthy-looking appendix; she underwent detorsion of the fallopian tube and incidental appendectomy. Mean operative time was 50.5 minutes (range, 20-135 minutes). Length of postoperative hospital stay averaged 4.2 days (range, 1-11 days). One patient had a surgical wound infection, which was managed conservatively. Mean follow-up period was 14 months (range, 2-46 months). Seven pregnant women delivered healthy term infants, 2 had planned abortions, and 1 experienced fetal loss due to uterine infection and premature contractions 1 month after LA. Another patient had normal results at prenatal examination. CONCLUSION: Our data support the accumulating evidence that LA is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of acute appendicitis in all trimesters of pregnancy. Close maternal and fetal monitoring is essential during and after the operation.     

The surgeon on call is a strong factor determining the use of a laparoscopic approach for appendectomy

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic and open approaches are commonly used for appendectomy. No previous studies have specifically examined which factors determine whether a laparoscopic or open approach is used for appendectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 140 patients who underwent a laparoscopic (n = 60) or open (n = 80) appendectomy between January 2000 and April 2001 at our hospital. Medical records were reviewed, and the data were analyzed using chi-square analysis, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and multivariate logistic regression. We studied patient age, gender, type of surgeon on call, leukocyte count, pathology, and the use of diagnostic imaging to determine whether there was any association with the use of a laparoscopic approach. RESULTS: The type of surgeon on call was strongly correlated with a laparoscopic approach. Of the 61 appendectomies performed by laparoscopic surgeons (those who use laparoscopy for operations other than appendectomies and cholecystectomies), 55 (90%) were laparoscopic and 6 (10%) were open. Of the 79 appendectomies performed by nonlaparoscopic surgeons, 5 (6%) were laparoscopic and 74 (94%) were open (multivariate odds ratio, 136; 95% confidence interval, 39-475; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The surgeon on call when a patient is admitted is an important factor determining whether a patient will receive a laparoscopic or open appendectomy.     

A prospective randomized trial comparing open versus laparoscopic appendectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The authors determined whether there was an advantage to laparoscopic appendectomy when compared with open appendectomy. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND DATA: The advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy were questioned because the recovery from open appendectomy is brief. METHODS: From January 15, 1992 through January 15, 1993, 75 patients older than 9 years were entered into a study randomizing the choice of operation to either the open or the laparoscopic technique. Statistical comparisons were performed using the Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were assigned to the open appendectomy group and 38 patients were assigned to the laparoscopic appendectomy group. Two patients were converted intraoperatively from laparoscopic appendectomies to open procedures. Thirty-one patients (81%) in the open group had acute appendicitis, as did 32 patients (84%) in the laparoscopic group. Mean duration of surgery was 65 minutes for open appendectomy and 87 minutes for laparoscopic appendectomy (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in length of hospitalization, interval until resumption of a regular diet, or morbidity. Duration of both parenteral and oral analgesic use favored laparoscopic appendectomy (2.0 days versus 1.2 days, and 8.0 days versus 5.4 days, p < 0.05). All patients were instructed to return to full activities by 2 weeks postoperatively. This occurred at an average of 25 days for the open appendectomy group versus 14 days for the laparoscopic appendectomy group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomies have a shorter duration of analgesic use and return to full activities sooner postoperatively when compared with patients who underwent open appendectomies. The authors consider laparoscopic appendectomy to be the procedure of choice in patients with acute appendicitis.     

Laparoscopy may be lowering the threshold to operate on patients with suspected appendicitis

Background: Although several randomized trials have compared postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic appendectomy, few have examined whether laparoscopy has affected preoperative decision making. We hypothesized that surgeon enthusiasm for laparoscopic appendectomy would lower the threshold to operate on patients with possible appendicitis. To examine this question we designed a retrospective cohort study in the setting of a tertiary care medical center. Methods: We studied a consecutive series of 130 patients taken to the operating room with preoperative diagnoses of appendicitis between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 1999. We excluded pregnant patients, those under 18 or over 75, those admitted electively for chronic symptoms, and those undergoing appendectomy incidental to another procedure. Measures included the proportion of patients with normal appendices or acute appendicitis (perforated and nonperforated), as determined from the pathology report. Other clinical and demographic data were obtained by review of the medical records. Results: During the study period, 87 patients (67%) underwent open appendectomy and 43 patients (33%) underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Women were more likely to receive the laparoscopic approach than men (43% vs 24% p = 0.021). Preoperative use of advanced imaging tests (computed tomography or ultrasound) was more prevalent in the laparoscopic group (40% vs 30%, p = 0.271). Patients undergoing the laparoscopic procedure were considerably less likely to have acute appendicitis than those undergoing an open one (67% vs 92%, p <0.001). However, among patients with confirmed appendicitis, those undergoing laparoscopic surgery were less likely to be perforated than those who had an open procedure (4.6% vs 25% p = 0.004). Conclusion: At our hospital, the availability of the laparoscopic approach to appendectomy may have lowered the threshold to operate on patients with possible appendicitis, as reflected in higher negative exploration rates and lower rates of perforated appendicitis.     

转移性肝癌的腹腔镜肝切除术

目的探讨转移性肝癌的腹腔镜肝切除术经验。方法对1997年至2004年度布里斯班医院所进行的所有肝切除术患者进行回顾性研究。结果有84例患者进行了腹腔镜肝切除，其中33例（39％）为恶性肿瘤。33例中28例为转移性，其中22例为结直肠癌转移。13例患者进行左肝外侧叶切除，9例患者进行了右半肝切除，其余6例行肝段或不规则切除。67％失去随访，追踪随访12例患者2年存活率和无瘤生存率为75％和67％。结论在高度选择过的恶性肿瘤患者中行腹腔镜肝切除术是可行的。但要求术者有丰富的开腹肝切除术经验和腹腔镜操作技能。     

无夹3孔法腹腔镜阑尾切除术580例临床分析

目的探讨腹腔镜阑尾切除术中无夹电凝处理阑尾系膜及普通丝线结扎阑尾根部的可靠性、优越性及安全性。方法回顾分析2004年5月至2010年5月间无夹3孔法腹腔镜阑尾切除术580例患者的临床资料。结果手术顺利完成576例,中转开腹4例（占0.7%）;其中包括肥胖患者56例;异位阑尾22例;6～12岁儿童患者同时合并斜疝11例;手术时间15～150min,术中出血0～25ml,平均住院日4.5d,随访2个月至5年半,术后无肠系膜出血、阑尾残端瘘、肠粘连等并发症发生。结论无夹3孔法腹腔镜阑尾切除其方法安全、可靠可行。