Laparoscopic appendectomy significantly reduces length of stay for perforated appendicitis

Introduction Though ruptured appendicitis is not a contraindication to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), most surgeons have not embraced LA as the first-line approach to ruptured appendicitis. In fact, in 2002, the Cochrane Database Review concluded: 1) the clinical effects of LA are “small and of limited clinical relevance,” and 2) the effects of LA in perforated appendicitis require further study. Objective To study the effects of LA vs open appendectomy (OA) among adults with appendicitis. Methods In 2003, 272 adults underwent appendectomy at a large County hospital, and were enrolled in a prospective clinical pathway that detailed their hospital course from time of diagnosis to discharge. Data included patient demographics, time elapse from diagnosis to surgery, surgical technique (LA vs. OA), operative diagnosis (acute vs perforated appendicitis) and post-operative length of stay (LOS). Results Complete data was obtained for 264 (97%) patients. Patient demographics were similar in the LA and OA groups (p > 0.05). Patients with LA had a significantly shorter LOS than OA by 1.6 days (p < 0.05). This LOS was significantly shorter among those with ruptured appendicitis vs. non-ruptured appendicitis (2.0 days vs. 0.3 day reduction, p = 0.0357). Rank-order multiple regression analysis, controlling for all other factors, showed laparoscopy to have a significant effect on postoperative LOS in all appendicitis cases, especially ruptured appendicitis. Conclusions The two-day reduction in LOS among those with ruptured appendicitis who underwent LA was significant enough to overcome the smaller benefit of LA in acute appendicitis. From a hospital utilization point of view, LA should be considered as the first-line approach for all patients with appendicitis.     

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗小儿急性阑尾炎的对比研究

目的：对比腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗小儿复杂急性阑尾炎的临床疗效。方法：2004年1月至2009年1月收治小儿复杂阑尾炎253例,分别行腹腔镜阑尾切除术（laparoscopic appendectomy,LA）123例,开腹阑尾切除术（open appendectomy,OA）130例,比较两组术中出血量、恢复进食时间、术后住院时间、抗生素使用时间及术后并发症。结果：LA组术中出血量、恢复进食时间、腹腔引流管拔除时间、术后住院时间、抗生素使用时间均明显少于OA组,LA组术后切口感染、肠梗阻、腹腔脓肿发生率低于OA组。结论：腹腔镜治疗小儿复杂急性阑尾炎的疗效明显优于开腹手术。     

Laparoscopic appendectomy for simple and perforated appendicitis in children: the procedure of choice?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Whether laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is superior to open appendectomy (OA) for simple (SA) and perforated appendicitis (PA) in children is debatable. The operative experience of 4 senior pediatric surgeons at a single institution was studied over a 6-year period during a transition from OA in all cases to LA in all cases, to answer this question. METHODS: All appendectomies from December 1993 to December 1999 were reviewed for operative technique (OA, LA), presence of perforation (SA, PA), operating time (OT), length of stay (LOS), morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 1,128 appendectomies in children aged 14 months to 19 years, including 955 LA (653 in SA, 302 in PA) and 173 OA (86 in SA, 87 in PA). OT was equal for LA and OA in SA (52 minutes), but has dropped to less than 40 minutes for LA in the past year. OT in PA was slightly longer in LA versus OA (68 v. 58 minutes; P < .001) but recently has dropped in LA to less than 60 minutes. LOS in SA was 2 days for LA and 3 days for OA; in PA, LOS was 7 days in both LA and OA, but has dropped to 5 days for LA recently. Postoperative abscess rates and incidence of bowel obstruction did not differ between LA and OA in either group. There was no mortality. CONCLUSIONS: LA is at least as safe and effective as, if not superior to, OA for both simple and perforated appendicitis. Postoperative pain is less, and recovery is faster, thereby reducing LOS and overall cost. The growing demand for this procedure can be satisfied without increase in cost, morbidity, or mortality. Laparoscopic appendectomy is our procedure of choice in children.     

腹腔镜治疗小儿阑尾炎148例分析

目的总结腹腔镜阑尾切除术（LA）治疗儿童阑尾炎的经验。方法回顾性分析2004年1月至2011年4月行LA治疗儿童阑尾炎患儿共148例,对比同期139例开腹阑尾切除术（OA）患儿临床资料,比较术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、切口感染、置腹腔引流率、拔腹腔引流管时间、腹腔脓肿发生率、肠梗阻发生率、再次手术率差异、手术时间等指标。结果IA组与OA组比较,两组中术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、切口感染、腹腔脓肿发生率、肠梗阻发生率、再次手术率差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;置腹腔引流率、拔腹腔引流管时间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;LA组较OA组手术时间长,差异有统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论LA适于治疗各型儿童阑尾炎,安全有效,术后并发症少,美容效果佳,是阑尾炎治疗的一种较好的方法。     

Laparoscopy in the contemporary management of acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) with open appendectomy (OA) focusing on the negative appendectomy rate (NAR), emergency department (ED) to operating room (OR) time, procedure length, and histopathological correlation. METHODS: All appendectomies for appendicitis over a 6-year period at a single hospital were reviewed. Open and laparoscopic procedures were compared. RESULTS: There were 1,312 appendectomies (54.6% OA and 45.4% LA) Mean ED to OR time was as follows: LA 10.8 hours (standard deviation [SD] +/- 9.0) versus 9.8 hours (SD +/- 8.5) OA (P = .0333). Mean OR time was 61.2 minutes (SD +/- 29.1) LA versus 57.7 minutes (SD +/- 28) OA (P = .0293). NAR was 18.3%, LA 23.3% versus 14.0% OA (P < .0001). Postoperative correlation with histopathology was 86% for LA versus 92% OA (P = .0003). In the LA group, 9.9% with a "normal" appendix had appendicitis by histopathology. CONCLUSIONS: LA is associated with increased presentation to procedure time, operative time, and negative appendectomy rate. Removing a "normal" appendix during LA in the absence of alternate pathology is recommended.     

A comparative study of routine laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the outcomes of routine laparoscopy and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients with suspected appendicitis. This is a retrospective study of the outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy compared with outcomes for patients undergoing open appendectomy (OA) during the time that LA came into use. METHOD: Results of patients managed with routine laparoscopy and LA for suspected acute appendicitis were reviewed and analyzed. The preoperative and intraoperative findings were recorded. The clinical outcomes were compared with those of patients undergoing OA in the preceding 10 months. RESULTS: During the LA study period, 97 patients (47 men) with the median age of 34 years (range, 18 to 79) presented with clinical features of acute appendicitis. With the exclusion of 5 patients with open operations and 10 patients with other pathologies, 82 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (Group A) for appendicitis. Thirty-one (37.8%) patients had complicated appendicitis (perforated or gangrenous appendicitis). Conversions were required in 6 patients (7.3%). During the OA period, 125 patients (57 men) with the median age of 42 (range, 19 to 79) years were operated on. With the exclusion of 6 patients with other pathologies, 119 underwent OA for acute appendicitis (Group B). Fifty-one (42.9%) had either perforated or gangrenous appendicitis. The median durations of surgery in Group A and Group B were 80 minutes (range, 40 to 195) and 60 minutes (range, 25 to 260), respectively (P < 0.005). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between the 2 groups (13.4% in Group A versus 15.8% in Group B). The median hospital stay for patients in Group A and Group B were 3.0 days (range, 1 to 47) and 4.0 days (range, 1 to 47), respectively (P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that routine laparoscopy and LA for suspected acute appendicitis is safe and is associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay. Other intra-abdominal pathologies can also be diagnosed more accurately with the laparoscopic approach.     

Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy

Background:

Appendectomy, being the most common surgical procedure performed in general surgery, is still being performed by both open and laparoscopic methods due to a lack of consensus as to which is the most appropriate method. Because further trials are necessary and few such studies have been performed in developing countries, we decided to evaluate the outcomes of the 2 procedures to share our experience with the international community.

Methods:

Consecutive patients with suspected acute appendicitis who underwent laparoscopic (LA) (n=48) and open (n=52) appendectomy (OA) over a period of 3 years were studied. Clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups in relation to operative time, analgesia used, length of hospital stay, return to work, resumption of a regular diet, and postoperative complications.

Results:

Mean age of patients was 25.8 years in the laparoscopic and 25.5 years in the open group. Patient demographics were similar in both groups (P>0.05). There was significantly less need for analgesia (1.0±0.5 in LA and 1.5±0.6 doses in OA), a short hospital stay (1.4±0.7 in LA and 3.4±1.0 days in OA), early return to work (12.6±3.3 in LA and 19.1±3.1 days in OA), and less time needed to return to a regular diet (20.1±2.9 in LA and 22.0±4.7, P<0.05 in OA) in the laparoscopic appendectomy group. Operative time was significantly shorter (54.9±14.7 in LA and 13.6±12.6 minutes in OA) in the open group. Total number of complications was less in the laparoscopic group; however, there was no statistically significant difference.

Conclusion:

The laparoscopic technique is a safe and clinically beneficial operative procedure. It provides certain advantages over open appendectomy, including short hospital stay, decreased requirement of postoperative analgesia, early food tolerance, and earlier return to normal activities. Where feasible, laparoscopy should be undertaken as the initial procedure of choice for most cases of suspected appendicitis.     

Day case emergency laparoscopic appendectomy

Background Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is associated with a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications than conventional open appendectomy (OA). This study aimed to examine the safety and efficacy of day case emergency LA. Methods The records of patients undergoing emergency LA under the care of two laparoscopic surgeons over a 3-year period (Februrary 2003 to February 2006) were reviewed to examine hospital length of stay (LOS), complications, histology, grade of the operating surgeon, and time required to perform the procedure. Results A total of 104 patients (median age, 25 years; range, 11–72 years; 58 men) underwent LA, with 9 and 66 patients discharged in 8 and 24 hours, respectively (median LOS 22 hours: range 6–170 hours). One patient underwent conversion to OA. Histologically, 86 patients had appendicitis and 18 had normal appendices with another pathology present. The median operative time was 35 min (range, 20–80 min). The complications included three wound infections and two pelvic abscesses not requiring further operative intervention. Conclusion Day case emergency LA is safe and effective for treating selected patients.     

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.     

开腹和腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗妊娠期急性阑尾炎的对照研究

目的 比较开腹阑尾切除术（open appendectomy,OA）和腹腔镜阑尾切除术（laparoscopic appendectomy,LA）治疗妊娠期急性阑尾炎的安全性及疗效.方法 回顾性分析我院2008年1月至2013年1月收治的68例妊娠早、中期急性阑尾炎的临床资料,其中OA组36例,LA组32例,并进行比对分析.结果 两组病例手术均顺利完成,OA组和LA组在妊娠相关并发症发生率上无明显差异（P＞0.05）;而在术后肛门排气时间、住院时间及术后并发症上,LA组均明显优于OA组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.结论 LA治疗妊娠早、中期急性阑尾炎是安全可行的,具有创伤小、术后恢复快、并发症少等优点.     

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis

The role of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for perforated appendicitis is under investigation. A retrospective study was conducted to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy (OA) for perforated appendicitis. From January 2001 through December 2003, 229 patients with perforated appendicitis were treated at Far-Eastern Memorial Hospital. LA was successfully completed in 91 of 99 patients. OA was performed in 130 patients. Operation time was longer in the LA group (mean ± SD =96.1±43.1 vs. 67.8±32.2 minutes, P<0.01). Return of oral intake was faster in the LA group (3.2±2.4 vs. 5.0±7.0 days, P<0.01). The intravenous antibiotic usage period was shorter in the LA group (4.4±2.8 vs. 6.3±7.1 days, P<0.01). The postoperative wound infection rates were 15.2 % (LA group) and 30.7% (OA group). The overall infectious complication rates were 19% in the LA group and 37% in the OA group (P<0.01). Hospital stay days were shorter for the LA group (6.3±2.9 vs. 9.3±8.6 days, P<0.01). Our results indicated that laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe and effective procedure for treating patients with perforated appendicitis.     

腹腔镜与开腹阑尾切除术的临床比较

目的:比较腹腔镜与开腹手术切除阑尾的优缺点。方法:回顾性分析我院2010年1月1日—2012年3月31日292例行阑尾切除术患者的临床资料,根据手术方法分为单孔法腹腔镜阑尾手术组、多孔法腹腔镜阑尾手术组和开腹阑尾手术组,比较手术时间、出血量、术后排气时间、术后住院时间切口愈合等级及感染率。结果:单孔法腹腔镜阑尾手术组中1例转为多孔法,多孔法腹腔镜阑尾手术组中1例中转开腹,其余患者均完成手术。2例多孔法腹腔镜阑尾手术患者术后并发粘连性肠梗阻,经保守治疗后好转。与传统开腹手术相比,腹腔镜阑尾切除术手术时间短、出血量少、术后排气快、术后住院时间短;对于急性单纯性阑尾炎,单孔腹腔镜手术比多孔法出血更少,瘢痕更小。结论:腹腔镜阑尾切除术对腹部干扰少,单孔法切口更为隐蔽,在熟练掌握手术技术的前提下可以广泛应用。     

腹腔镜与开腹阑尾切除术的对比研究

目的比较腹腔镜阑尾切除术(laparoscopicappendectomy,LA)与开腹阑尾切除术(openappendectomy,OA)的适应证、安全性及临床效果。方法回顾性对比分析168例LA与同期216例OA的临床资料。结果比较两组病人术后下床活动时间、术后排气时间、疼痛评分、止痛药使用率和术后并发症发生率,LA组均优于OA组(P<0.05),但手术时间和综合费用无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论与OA相比,LA具有适应证广、安全性高、创伤小、痛苦少、恢复快,可同时进行腹腔和盆腔的探查与处理的优势。     

腹腔镜治疗小儿穿孔性阑尾炎对血清C反应蛋白和降钙素原的影响

目的比较腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗小儿穿孔性阑尾炎手术前后血清C反应蛋白（C—reactive protein,CRP）和降钙素原（procalcitonin,PCT）的变化。方法采用前瞻性对照研究方法,将2010年6月～2012年10月临床诊断为穿孔性阑尾炎的78例患儿按家属意愿分为开放组（38例）和腹腔镜组（40例）。分别于术前0．5h、术后24h及48h采外周静脉血,分别用ELISA法和胶体免疫结合法测定血清CRP和PCT。结果2组血清CRP和PCT术前差异无显著性（P〉0．05）;术后24h较术前均明显升高（P〈0．05）,开放组CRP升高更明显（P=0．000）;术后48h腹腔镜组PCT已恢复至术前水平（P〉0．05）,腹腔镜组CRP和开放组CRP、PCT仍高于术前（P〈0．05）,且开放组明显高于腹腔镜组（P=0．000）。结论与开放手术相比,腹腔镜治疗小儿穿孔性阑尾炎引起CRP、PCT的变化较小。     

Laparoscopic appendectomy in children can be done as a fast-track or same-day surgery.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has reduced the length of hospital stay for common operations like cholecystectomy, gastric fundoplication, and appendectomy. We have noticed a reduction in length of hospital stay for children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. We, therefore, looked at our data to assess whether laparoscopic appendectomy in children could be performed as fast-track or same-day surgery (< or = 24-hour postoperative stay). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the records of all children who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during a 3-year period (7/97 to 7/00). RESULTS: Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 79 children (44 boys and 35 girls), between 2 to 17 years of age (mean, 11 years). In 4 (5%) children with perforated appendicitis, the laparoscopic appendectomy was converted to an open appendectomy. At operation, 51 (64.5%) had acute appendicitis, 22 (27.8%) had perforated appendicitis, 4 (5%) had ruptured ovarian cysts, and 2 (2.5%) had no pathology. The median operative time was 54 minutes. Total length of stay for all 79 patients was a median of 58 hours, and median postoperative LOS was 35 hours. Complications included wound infection (2), abdominal abscess (4), drug rash (2), and epididymo-orchitis (1). In 57 (72%) children without perforated appendicitis, the total length of hospital stay was a median of 42 hours, while median postoperative length of stay was only 28 hours. Thirty-two (56%) children went home in < or = 24 hours following laparoscopic appendectomy. No significant morbidity was noted in the nonperforated group (drug rash, 1 fever > 24 hrs, 3); and no readmissions or reoperations were necessary on follow-up. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and effective for treating children with appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy may be safely performed as fast-track or same-day surgery, in select children without perforated appendicitis, with a postoperative stay of < or = 24 hours.     

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.     

Appendicectomy: laparoscopic or ''open approach''?

AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of open appendectomy versus laparoscopic appendectomy in the surgical treatment of acute appendicitis. We have compared the following items: operating time, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications and costs. METHODS: The study was conducted on 435 patients admitted in our Department from December 1993 to December 2003 with diagnosis of acute appendicitis: 339 (77.9%) cases were operated with laparoscopic approach (LA group) and 96 (22.1%) cases with open approach (OA group) according to personal experience of surgeons on laparoscopic technique and patient's anthropometrical conformation. RESULTS: Mean operative time in LA group was 50 minutes (range 25-195) and 65 minutes (range 35-160) for OA group. In 15 patients (4.4%), the operation had to be converted to open approach. The morbidity was observed in 4.4% of patients for the LA group and 14.6% for the OA group. Hospital stay was faster for patients having laparoscopic appendectomy (2.5 days vs 3.5 days). Pain in the 1st and 2nd postoperative days, evaluated on the use of pain medication, was less in patient in LA group whereas the costs were higher in the LA group than in OA group. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience the laparoscopic approach to acute appendicitis can be considered safe and effective with diagnostic and therapeutic value. It significantly offers all the advantages of mini-invasive surgery reported in literature.     

小儿腹腔镜阑尾切除与开腹阑尾切除的临床对比研究

【摘要】 目的 对比研究小儿腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)与传统开腹阑尾切除术(OA)的临床疗效及安全性。方法 回顾性分析2009年1月~2012年12月期间进行LA和OA的93例小儿阑尾炎患者的临床资料,对两组手术时间、术中出血情况、术后恢复情况等进行统计对比分析。结果〓两组患儿手术及恢复顺利,术后无严重并发症。两组手术时间及术中出血量差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);LA组术后肛门排气时间、下床活动时间、切口疼痛时间、术后住院天数均低于OA组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 与OA比较,小儿LA具有创伤小、并发症少,恢复快及美容等优势,是治疗小儿阑尾炎理想的手术方式。     

Complicated appendicitis--is the laparoscopic approach appropriate? A comparative study with the open approach: outcome in a community hospital setting

Good outcome has been reported with the laparoscopic approach in uncomplicated appendicitis, but a higher incidence of postoperative intraabdominal abscesses has been reported after laparoscopic appendectomy in complicated appendicitis. This retrospective comparative study compares outcome after laparoscopic (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) in complicated appendicitis. All patients who had LA or OA for complicated appendicitis between January 2003 and February 2006 were included in the study. Data collection included demographics, operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay (LOS), complications, readmission, and reoperative rates. The primary end points for analysis were postoperative intraabdominal abscess and complication rates and secondary end points were LOS and operative time. All data were analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis. Of 104 patients, 43 patients underwent LA and 61 had OA. The mean age (24.8 +/- 16.5 versus 31.3 +/- 18.9, P = 0.08) in the LA group was lower than the OA group because there was a significantly higher proportion of pediatric patients (34.8% versus 14.8%, P = 0.02) who had LA. There was no significant difference in gender (female/male, 14/29 versus 27/34, P = 0.3) or American Society of Anesthesiologists class distribution (American Society of Anesthesiologists 1/2/3/4/, 35/7/1/0 versus 45/12/3/1, P = 0.68) between the two groups. The operative time (100.5 +/- 36.2 versus 81.5 +/- 29.5 minutes, P = 0.03) was significantly longer and the estimated blood loss (21 mL versus 33 mL, P = 0.01) was lower in LA when compared with OA, but there was no significant difference in the number of patients with preoperative peritonitis versus abscesses (7/36 versus 13/48, P = 0.6) in both groups. There was no difference in the median LOS (6 [interquartile range 5-9] versus 6 [interquartile range 4-8], P = 0.7) in the two groups. The conversion rate in LA was 18.6% (n = 8). There was also no significant difference in the complication (17/43 [39.5%] versus 21/61 [34.4%], P = 0.54), reoperative (3/43 [7%] versus 0/61 [0%], P = 0.07), and 30-day readmission (5/41 [11.6%] versus 3/61 [4.9%], P = 0.23) rates between the two groups. The rate of postoperative intraabdominal abscesses was significantly higher in the LA group when compared with the OA group (6/43 [14%] versus 0/61 [0%], P = 0.04) and the wound infection (1/43 [2.3%] versus 5/61 [8.2%], P = 0.4) and pulmonary complication (0/43 [0%] versus 3/61 [4.9%], P = 0.26) rate was higher in the OA group. There was no mortality in the LA group, but there was one mortality in the OA group resulting from postoperative myocardial infarction. Laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed in patients with complicated appendicitis with a comparative operative time, LOS, and complication rates but results in a significantly higher intraabdominal abscess rate and lower wound infection rate when compared with OA.     

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.