Outcome of laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in children

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic (LA) vs open appendectomy (OA) in patients with perforated appendicitis in our center.

Methods

Retrospective review from July 2002 to April 2007 (institutional review board-approved), evaluating 281 patients with perforated appendicitis based on surgical approach. We compared demographics, mean operative time, length of stay (LOS), infectious complications, and follow-up in patients with OA (n = 213) and LA (n = 68).

Results

Laparoscopic appendectomy patients were significantly older (12 vs 9.4 years), heavier (51.8 vs 36.6 kg) and more frequently girls (47.8% vs 34.3%). Mean operative time was longer in LA (72.6 vs 50.2 minutes). Median LOS was 5 days in LA and 6 days in OA. Few patients in each group required a drainage procedure for a persistent abscess (LA 4.4%, OA 4.7%; P = 1.000). Laparoscopic appendectomy patients had fewer wound infections (1.5% vs 9.5%; P = .034), and less follow-up visits were needed (>2 clinic visits 4.5% vs 16.4%; P = .013).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy has a shorter median LOS, a trend toward less postoperative infectious complications, and fewer clinic visits than OA, which makes it a safe and effective procedure for patients with perforated appendicitis.     

Routine interval appendectomy in children is not indicated

Background

This study evaluates outcomes for children treated without interval appendectomy (IA) after successful nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis.

Methods

A retrospective study of pediatric patients with appendicitis was performed from 12 regional acute-care hospitals from 1992 to 2004 with mean length of follow-up of 7.5 years. Main outcomes were recurrent appendicitis and cumulative length of hospital stay.

Results

The study included 6439 patients, of which 6367 (99%) underwent initial appendectomy. Seventy-two (1%) patients were initially managed nonoperatively and 11 patients had IA. Of the remaining 61 patients without IA, 5 (8%) developed recurrent appendicitis. Age, sex, type of appendicitis, and abscess drainage had no influence on recurrent appendicitis. Cumulative length of hospital stay was 6.6 days in patients without IA, 8.5 days in patients with IA, and 9.6 days in patients with recurrent appendicitis.

Conclusion

Recurrent appendicitis is rare in pediatric patients after successful nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis. Routine IA is not necessarily indicated for these children.     

Complicated appendicitis in children: is laparoscopic appendectomy appropriate? A comparative study with the open appendectomy—our experience

Purpose

Good outcomes have been reported with laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for uncomplicated appendicitis in children, but the use of laparoscopy for complicated appendicitis in children is more controversial. This is related to a higher incidence of postoperative abdominal and wound infections. The purpose of this trial was to retrospectively compare LA and open appendectomy (OA) for complicated appendicitis and evaluate the efficacy of LA in children with complicated appendicitis.

Methods

The outcome of 128 patients with complicated appendicitis in children was retrospectively analyzed. There were 80 children in the LA group and 48 in the OA group. The appendectomies were performed by a single senior surgeon and his surgical trainees. There was no selection of cases for LA. Data collection included demographics, operative time, resumption of diet, infectious complications (wound infection and intraabdominal abscess), length of hospitalization, and duration of antibiotic use.

Results

There were no cases of LA that required conversion to OA. The operative time for LA (88.5 ± 28.8 minutes for LA vs 71.8 ± 30.6 minutes for OA; t = 3.10; P = .002) was longer. Patients in the LA group returned to oral intake earlier (1.8 ± 0.6 days for LA vs 2.8 ± 0.8 days for OA; t = −8.04; P < .01) and had a shorter length of hospital stay (6.5 ± 2.2 days for LA vs 7.8 ± 2.9 days for OA; t = −2.87; P = .005). The incidence of wound infection (1/80 [1.3%] for LA vs 6/48 [12.5%] for OA; P < .05) and postoperative intraabdominal abscess (2/80 [2.5%] for LA vs 7/48 [14.6%] for OA; P < .05) in LA group was lower. No significant difference was found in the duration of antibiotic administration between the 2 groups (5.8 ± 1.8 days for LA vs 6.3 ± 2.3 days for OA; t = −1.37; P = .174). No mortality was observed in either group.

Conclusions

The minimally invasive laparoscopic technique is feasible, safe, and efficacious for children with complicated appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy should be the initial procedure of choice for most cases of complicated appendicitis in children.     

Postoperative bowel obstruction after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children: a 15-year experience

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to determine and evaluate the incidence of postoperative bowel obstruction (PBO) after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children.

Material and Methods

The medical files of children who have undergone an appendectomy, either via the laparoscopic or open approach, at our department from 1992 until 2007 were reviewed. Collected data included age at appendectomy, initial surgical approach, time interval to PBO, and type of definitive treatment. The incidences of PBO after laparoscopic and open appendectomy were compared with the χ² analysis.

Results

From the 1684 children who were found, 1371 had nonperforated appendicitis and 313 had perforated appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 954 patients of the nonperforated group and in 221 of the perforated group. Open appendectomy was performed in 417 and 92 patients of the 2 groups, respectively. Overall, the incidence of PBO development was 2.2%. In the laparoscopic appendectomy population, a significantly low incidence of 1.19% of PBO development was detected, compared with the 4.51% of the open appendectomy group (P < .0001).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy diminishes the potential of PBO development. The overall incidence of PBO is not related to the severity of the disease but only to the initial operative approach.     

Is early laparoscopic appendectomy feasible in children with acute appendicitis presenting with an appendiceal mass? A prospective study

Background

The management of an appendiceal mass remains controversial with 2 schools of thought; early surgical intervention vs nonoperative management with or without interval appendectomy. The aim is to determine the role and safety of early laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in children with acute appendicitis presenting with an appendiceal mass.

Methods

This is a prospective study of 88 consecutive pediatric patients who underwent attempted LA for suspected acute appendicitis at KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Singapore, between May and October 2003.

Results

A total of 88 patients with a mean age of 10 ± 3 years (range, 3-16 years) underwent LA for an appendiceal mass (n = 22), simple appendicitis (n = 36), other complicated (gangrenous or perforated) appendicitis (n = 23), and a normal appendix (n = 7). There were 7 conversions to open appendicectomy, 3 of which occurred in patients with an appendiceal mass. There were no perioperative or postoperative mortalities. Morbidity occurred in only one patient who underwent LA for perforated appendicitis. He had prolonged sepsis that resolved after 2 weeks of intravenous antibiotics. None of the patients with an appendiceal mass developed complications. Patients who underwent early LA for an appendiceal mass had a statistically significant (P < .05) longer operating time (median, 103 minutes; interquartile range, 90-151 minutes, vs median, 87 minutes; interquartile range, 71-112 minutes), prolonged time to ambulation (median, 2.0 days; interquartile range, 2-2.5 days, vs median, 1.0 days; interquartile, 1-2 days), increased time to resumption of diet (median, 4 days; interquartile, 3-5 days, vs median, 2 days; interquartile, 2-3 days), and longer postoperative stay (median, 6.0 days; interquartile, 5.5-6.5 days, vs median, 4.0 days; interquartile, 3-5.5 days) compared with patients presenting with appendicitis without mass formation. However, there was no statistical difference in these parameters when LA for an appendiceal mass was compared with LA for other complicated appendicitis (perforated and gangrenous).

Conclusion

Although early LA for an appendiceal mass is a technically demanding procedure, it can be performed safely in children with minimal morbidity and mortality. In an era where patients' demand for “key-hole” surgery is rising, early LA is a safe and viable option in the management of children with an appendiceal mass. It also offers the advantage of avoiding misdiagnoses and the need for a second hospitalization.     

Antibiotics and appendicitis in the pediatric population: an American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee systematic review

Objective

The aim of the study was to review evidence-based data regarding the use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis in children.

Data Source

Data were obtained from PubMed, MEDLINE, and citation review.

Study Selection

We conducted a literature search using “appendicitis” combined with “antibiotics” with children as the target patient population. Studies were selected based on relevance for the following questions:

(1)

What perioperative antibiotics should be used for pediatric patients with nonperforated appendicitis?

(2)

For patients with perforated appendicitis treated with appendectomy:

a.

What perioperative intravenous antibiotics should be used?

b.

How long should perioperative intravenous antibiotics be used?

c.

Should oral antibiotics be used?

(3)

For patients with perforated appendicitis treated with initial nonoperative management, what antibiotics should be used in the initial management?

Results

Children with nonperforated appendicitis should receive preoperative, broad-spectrum antibiotics. In children with perforated appendicitis who had undergone appendectomy, intravenous antibiotic duration should be based on clinical criteria. Furthermore, broad-spectrum, single, or double agent therapy is as equally efficacious as but is more cost-effective than triple agent therapy. If intravenous antibiotics are administered for less than 5 days, oral antibiotics should be administered for a total antibiotic course of 7 days. For children with perforated appendicitis who did not initially undergo an appendectomy, the duration of broad-spectrum, intravenous antibiotics should be based on clinical symptoms.

Conclusions

Current evidence supports the use of guidelines as described above for antibiotic therapy in children with acute and perforated appendicitis.     

Failure in the nonoperative management of pediatric ruptured appendicitis: predictors and consequences

Introduction

The initial nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis fails in 15% to 25% of children. These children have complications and increased hospitalization. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of failure.

Methods

Children with perforated appendicitis treated with antibiotics and intent for nonoperative management over a 4-year period were reviewed. Seventy-five children were identified and included in the study. Failure was defined as undergoing appendectomy before the initially planned interval.

Results

Nine (12%) of the patients required appendectomy sooner than initially planned. Age, presenting symptoms, physical examination findings, and white blood cell (WBC) count were similar in both success and failure groups. Absence of abscess and presence of appendicolith were both predictors of failure in a multivariate analysis, which included the presence of small bowel obstruction. The failed group had a longer median total length of stay (18 days [range, 4-67] vs 8 days [range, 4-31]; P = .002) and underwent 3 times as many computed tomography scans as successes (3 [range, 2-7] vs 1 [range, 0-5]; P < .001).

Conclusion

Lack of abscess and presence of an appendicolith predict failure of nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis in children even when the effect of small bowel obstruction is accounted for. Children with these characteristics may benefit from alternative management strategies.     

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy conducted intracorporeally with the aid of a transabdominal sling suture

Background/Purpose

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is becoming popular for the treatment of acute and perforated appendicitis. Since it was first described, LA has been modified various times. We present the results of a new technique of LA conducted through a single port without exteriorizing the appendix to perform the operation.

Materials and Methods

Single-port LA was attempted in 38 patients (23 boys, 15 girls). Under general anesthesia, an 11-mm port with two 5-mm working channels or an 11-mm port through which a 10-mm scope (0°) with a parallel eyepiece and a 6-mm working channel was inserted through the umbilicus. The appendix was grasped and dissected from the surrounding tissues with a single dissector or grasper. With a percutaneously inserted suture from the right lower quadrant into the peritoneal cavity, the appendix was pulled toward the abdominal wall after passing the suture through the mesoappendix. After mesenteric dissection with hook cautery, the base of the appendix was ligated with 2-0 polyglactin with a fisherman knot. The appendix was withdrawn into the trocar and extracted from the abdomen together with the trocar.

Results

Laparoscopic appendectomy was completed in 35 patients through a single port. A second port insertion was required in 3 patients. No peroperative and postoperative complications were encountered. Average duration of the procedure was 38 ± 5.6 minutes.

Conclusion

This unique method further improves the minimal invasiveness of LA because a single port is used. Single-port intracorporeal appendectomy procedure is a safe, highly minimal invasive procedure with excellent cosmetic results.     

Dollars and sense of interval appendectomy in children: a cost analysis

Purpose

Although initial nonoperative management of focal, perforated appendicitis in children is increasingly practiced, the need for subsequent interval appendectomy remains debated. We hypothesized that cost comparison would favor continued nonoperative management over routine interval appendectomy.

Methods

Decision tree analysis was used to compare continued nonoperative management with routine interval appendectomy after initial success with nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis. Outcome probabilities were obtained from literature review and cost estimates from the Kid's Inpatient Database. Sensitivity analyses were performed on the 2 most influential variables in the model, the probability of successful nonoperative management and the costs associated with successful observation. Monte Carlo simulation was performed using the range of cost estimates.

Results

Costs for continued nonoperative observation were estimated at $3080.78 as compared to $5034.58 for the interval appendectomy. Sensitivity analysis confirms a cost savings for nonoperative management as long as the likelihood of successful observation exceeds 60%. As the cost of nonoperative management increased, the required probability for its success also increased. Using wide distributions for both probability estimates as well as costs, Monte Carlo simulation favored continued observation in 75% of scenarios.

Conclusion

Continued nonoperative management has a cost advantage over routine interval appendectomy after initial success with conservative management in children with focal, perforated appendicitis.     

Single daily dosing ceftriaxone and metronidazole vs standard triple antibiotic regimen for perforated appendicitis in children: a prospective randomized trial

Introduction

Appendicitis is the most common emergency condition in children. Historically, a 3-drug regimen consisting of ampicillin, gentamicin, and clindamycin (AGC) has been used postoperatively for perforated appendicitis. A retrospective review at our institution has found single day dosing of ceftriaxone and metronidazole (CM) to be a more simple and cost-effective antibiotic strategy. Therefore, we performed a prospective, randomized trial to compare efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these 2 regimens.

Methods

After internal review board approval (IRB no. 04 12-149), children found to have perforated appendicitis at appendectomy were randomized to either once daily dosing of CM (2 total doses per day) or standard dosing of AGC (11 total doses per day). Perforation was defined as an identifiable hole in the appendix. The operative approach (laparoscopic), length of antibiotic use, and criteria for discharge were standardized for the groups. Based on our retrospective analysis using length of postoperative hospitalization as a primary end point, a sample size of 100 patients was calculated for an α of .5 and a power of 0.82.

Results

One hundred patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. On presentation, there were no differences in sex distribution, days of symptoms, temperature, or leukocyte count. There was no difference in abscess rate or wound infections between groups. The CM group resulted in significantly less antibiotic charges then the AGC group.

Conclusions

Once daily dosing with the 2-drug regimen (CM) offers a more efficient, cost-effective antibiotic management in children with perforated appendicitis without compromising infection control when compared to a traditional 3-drug regimen.     

An evidence-based definition for perforated appendicitis derived from a prospective randomized trial

Purpose

Appendicitis is the most common urgent condition in general surgery, and yet there is no evidence-based definition for perforation. Therefore, all retrospective data published on perforated appendicitis are unreliable because of an ill-defined denominator. For approximately 2 years beginning in April 2005, we performed a prospective randomized trial investigating 2 different antibiotic regimens for perforated appendicitis. During this study, we strictly defined perforation as a hole in the appendix or a fecalith in the abdomen. Before this prospective study, perforation was staff surgeon opinion. We investigated the abscess rates in both the perforated and nonperforated appendicitis populations before and during the study to determine if our definition was safe and that there was not an increased risk of abscess formation in patients treated as nonperforated.

Methods

Records of all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis during the immediate 2 years before using the definition were compared to those treated in the 2 years after the definition was implemented. Interval and incidental appendectomies were ruled out. The postoperative abscess rate (when perforation was not defined) was compared to the abscess rate of those for whom perforation was strictly defined.

Results

There were 292 patients treated for acute nonperforated appendicitis in the 2 years before the definition and 388 patients after the definition. There were 131 patients treated for perforated appendicitis before the definition and 161 after the definition was implemented. The abscess rate in those with perforated appendicitis increased from 14% to 18% after the definition was used. However, after the definition began to be used, the abscess rate for those patients treated as nonperforated decreased from 1.7% to 0.8%.

Conclusions

Defining perforation as a hole in the appendix or a fecalith in the abdomen is effective in identifying the patients at risk for postoperative abscess formation. Application of these criteria would allow substantial reduction in therapy for patients with purulent or gangrenous appendicitis who do not possess the same abscess risk. These data outline the first evidence-based definition of perforation.     

Ten-year experience with pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy--are we getting better?

Background/Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare our initial (1994-1997) and recent (2001-2003) experiences in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

Methods

A 2-year (2001-2003) retrospective chart review of cases of appendicitis was performed and compared with data obtained from 1994 to 1997 cases. Operating and anesthetic times as well as postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Cases of conversion to open appendectomy were included in the analysis.

Results

Two hundred and thirty-three LA cases from 2001 to 2003 were compared with 119 cases from 1994 to 1997. Operating time decreased significantly from 58 to 47 minutes in acute appendicitis (AA) and from 80 to 58 minutes in perforated appendicitis (PA). Anesthetic time decreased significantly in both AA (82 to 71 minutes) and PA (106 to 84 minutes). There were significant decreases in the conversion rate in PA (23.4% to 3.5%), although no change was seen in AA. In PA, the incidence of postoperative abscess decreased from 36.2% to 16.5%. There was no significant decrease in length of stay, amount of analgesia used, time to resume regular diet, or incidence of wound infections and bowel obstructions.

Conclusions

Ten years of experience in LA has resulted in decreases in anesthetic and operating times for AA and PA as well as decreases in the incidence of abscesses and conversion rates.     

Appendiceal fecalith is associated with early perforation in pediatric patients

Purpose

A fecalith is a fecal concretion that can obstruct the appendix leading to acute appendicitis. We hypothesized that the presence of a fecalith would lead to an earlier appendiceal perforation.

Methods

Between January 2001 and December 2005, the charts of all patients younger than 18 years old who underwent appendectomy at our institution were reviewed. Duration of symptoms and timing between presentation and operation were noted along with radiologic, operative, and pathologic findings.

Results

There were 388 patients who met the study criteria. A fecalith was present in 31% of patients (n = 121). The appendix was perforated in 57% of patients who had a fecalith vs 36% in patients without a fecalith (P < .001). The overall rate of interval appendectomies was 12%. A fecalith was present on the initial radiologic studies of 36% of the patients who had interval appendectomies, and the appendix was perforated significantly sooner in these patients when compared to those without a fecalith (91 vs 150 hours; P = .036).

Conclusion

The presence of fecalith is associated with earlier and higher rates of appendiceal perforation in pediatric patients with acute appendicitis. An expedient appendectomy should therefore be performed in the pediatric patient with a radiologic evidence of fecalith.     

Predictive value of white blood cell count and C-reactive protein in children with appendicitis

Background/Purpose

Few studies have addressed the predictive value of white blood cells (WBCs) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at different cutoff values in appendicitis. Our purpose was to determine the cutoff values for WBC and CRP at different periods during clinical evolution of appendicitis and to establish their use for the diagnosis of appendicitis and differentiation of simple from perforated appendicitis.

Methods

We studied 198 patients operated on for appendicitis, which were further divided into 4 subgroups according to the time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed for CRP and WBC; the best cutoff points were used to calculate the sensitivity and specificity to discriminate patients with and without appendicitis and patients with simple and perforated appendicitis.

Results

White blood cell and CRP individually and together had a high sensitivity to differentiate patients with and without appendicitis. The specificity of WBC and CRP taken individually and together to differentiate patients with simple and perforated appendicitis was high, but the sensitivity was low.

Conclusions

White blood cell and CRP could be used to support the clinical diagnosis of appendicitis, and, depending on the time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis, to differentiate patients with and without appendicitis and discriminate simple from perforated appendicitis.     

Comparison of Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy in Children: Data from The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2006–2008

Background  

The benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) remain undefined as compared to open appendectomy (OA) in children, particularly in cases of perforated appendicitis. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the outcomes of LA versus OA in perforated and nonperforated appendicitis in children.     

Is peritoneal drainage necessary in childhood perforated appendicitis?--a comparative study

Purpose/Background

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of peritoneal drainage (PD) on postoperative infective complications in cases with perforated appendicitis.

Method

One hundred nine patients (with PD) were evaluated retrospectively and 117 cases (with no drainage [ND]) were evaluated prospectively regarding complications like wound infection (WI), intraabdominal abscess (IAA), and small bowel obstruction caused by adhesions (SBO) in perforated appendicitis cases. The abdomen was irrigated with isotonic NaCl solution and the wounds were closed primarily in all patients.

Results

The total number of patients was 226 (male, 66.4%; female, 33.6%), with a mean age of 8.6 ± 3.4 years (range, 1-15 years). The WI rates in PD and ND groups were 28.4% to 16.2%, respectively. The ratio of IAA in the PD group was 12.8% which decreased to 3.4% in the ND group. The difference was statistically significant (P < .05). The postoperative hospitalization period in the PD and ND groups were 10.2 ± 6.5 and 8.3 ± 3.3 days, durations of antibiotic use were 9.5 ± 5.5 and 7.7 ± 2.7 days, durations of NG tube usage were 3.2 ± 1.5 and 2.2 ± 1.2 days, time to oral feeding was 3.7 ± 1.7 and 2.5 ± 1.4 days, and time to normalization of the body temperatures was 3.7 ± 2.3 vs 2.3 ± 1.7 days. All differences were statistically significant (P < .05). The ratio of SBO increased from 2.8% to 3.4% in the ND group, but this result was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

As a result of this study, we recommend that peritoneal drainage should be abandoned in childhood appendicitis.     

Laparoscopic drainage of intraabdominal abscess after appendectomy: an alternative to laparotomy in cases not amenable to percutaneous drainage

Purpose

Postoperative abscesses after appendectomy occur in 3% to 20% of cases and are more common in cases of perforated appendicitis. Smaller abscesses are often amenable to antibiotic therapy, but surgical drainage remains the mainstay of treatment for larger collections. Surgical options generally include percutaneous drainage and open laparotomy. Laparoscopic drainage of these abscesses has not been well characterized in the pediatric population.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe our experience with laparoscopic drainage of postappendectomy abscesses that were not amenable to percutaneous drainage.

Methods

This study is a retrospective review of all pediatric patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis at a tertiary pediatric medical center during a 4-year period (2006-2009). The review focuses on patients who developed abscesses after appendectomy, were unable to undergo percutaneous drainage, and were treated with laparoscopic abscess drainage.

Results

Twelve patients (7 male and 5 female) underwent laparoscopic drainage of postappendectomy abscesses. The mean age was 8.5 years old (range, 3-14 years). A clinical diagnosis of postoperative abscess was made when fevers, pain, and leukocytosis persisted despite broad-spectrum antibiotics. Computed tomography was performed in all patients. Abscesses ranged between 3 and 11 cm in size. The mean length of time between initial appendectomy and drainage procedure was 10 days. There were no complications specifically related to the laparoscopic drainage procedure. The mean length of the drainage procedure was 77 minutes (range, 30-196 minutes). The mean hospital length of stay after laparoscopic drainage was 6.5 days (range, 3-13 days) with patients maintained on intravenous antibiotics until afebrile and without leukocytosis.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic drainage is a safe and effective alternative for intraabdominal abscesses that occur after laparoscopic appendectomy. We recommend it as an alternative to open laparotomy when percutaneous drainage is not an option.     

The incidence and morbidity of adhesions after treatment of neonates with gastroschisis and omphalocele: a 30-year review

Background/Purpose

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a feared complication after correction of abdominal wall defects in neonates. Knowledge of its incidence and potential risk factors in a well-documented group with strict follow-up is needed to guide preventive measures.

Methods

Records of 170 neonates with abdominal wall defects, 59 gastroschisis (GS) and 111 omphalocele (OC), were reviewed focusing on SBO. Risk of SBO was calculated, and potential risk factors were analyzed. Long-term complaints possibly associated with adhesions were assessed through questionnaire.

Results

One hundred forty-seven neonates were operated on, 12 were treated nonoperatively, and 11 patients died shortly after birth. Defects were primarily closed in 128, 7 neonates needed prosthetic mesh, and 12 had a silastic sac inserted. Twenty-six (18%) neonates had SBO, 14 (25%) of 55 with GS, and 12 (13%) of 92 with OC (P = .06). Of the 26 with SBO, 26 (88%) needed laparotomy. Four patients died because of SBO. Most episodes (85%) were in the first year. Sepsis and fascia dehiscence were predicting risk factors for SBO. Abdominal pain and constipation were frequent long-term complaints not significantly associated with SBO.

Conclusions

Adhesive SBO is a frequent and serious complication in the first year after treatment of congenital abdominal wall defects. Sepsis and fascial dehiscence are predictive factors.     

Outpatient interval appendectomy after perforated appendicitis

Background

Interval appendectomy may be advisable after successful nonoperative treatment of perforated appendicitis. To reduce the perceived morbidity of interval appendectomy, we sought to determine if the operation could be done on an outpatient basis. This study is focused on patient comfort and safety after laparoscopic interval appendectomy (LIA).

Methods

This is a retrospective review of the clinical course and length of stay of 24 children who had LIA during a 4-year period.

Results

Of the 24 patients, 12 were discharged on the evening of surgery without incident. Nine additional patients were observed for the first postoperative night—2 for short episodes of temperature elevation, 3 for pain treated within the first 4 hours of recovery and requiring no further treatment, and 4 because the idea of outpatient appendectomy had yet to become popular. None of these patients was febrile overnight, none required narcotic or parenteral analgesics after leaving the recovery room, and all accepted feedings without nausea or vomiting. It is likely that all 9 of these patients could have been discharged on the day of operation. Three other patients stayed in the hospital for treatment of pain, low-grade fever, or slow resumption of feeding.

Conclusion

Of 24 patients, 21(88%) were or could have been discharged on the day of operation. When interval appendectomy is indicated, LIA can be performed safely as an outpatient surgical procedure in most children.     

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis in the obese population

Background

Use of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been increasing in obese patients. We evaluated the outcomes of LA compared with open appendectomy (OA) in obese patients.

Methods

By using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, clinical data of obese patients who underwent LA and OA for suspected acute appendicitis (perforated or nonperforated) from 2006 to 2008 were examined.

Results

A total of 42,426 obese patients underwent an appendectomy during this period. In acute nonperforated cases, LA had a lower overall complication rate (7.17% vs 11.72%; P < .01), mortality rate (.09% vs .23%; P < .01), mean hospital charges ($25,193 vs $26,380; P = .04), and shorter mean length of stay (2.0 vs 3.1 d; P < .01) compared with OA. Similarly, in perforated cases, LA was associated with a lower overall complication rate (22.34% vs 34.65%; P < .01), mortality rate (.0% vs .50%; P < .01), mean hospital charges ($36,843 vs $43,901; P < .01), and a shorter mean length of stay (4.4 vs 6.5 d; P < .01) compared with OA.

Conclusions

LA can be performed safely with superior outcomes compared with OA in obese patients and should be considered the procedure of choice for perforated and nonperforated appendicitis in these patients.