Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: an evaluation of postoperative factors

Background The use of laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial. Outcomes were compared between patients who had complicated appendicitis and those who had uncomplicated appendicitisMethods Consecutive patients (n = 304) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were studied. Patients undergoing open appendectomies also were compared ad hoc. Analgesia use, length of hospital stay, return to activity, and complication rates for the complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis subgroups were analyzed.Results Complete data were available for 243 patients (80%). There were no statistical differences in characteristics between the two groups. The operating times, lengths of hospital stay, return to activity times, complication rates, and analgesia requirements, both in the hospital and after discharge, were equivalent. A greater number of complicated cases required open conversion. Considering those with complicated appendicitis, the open group had a significantly longer mean hospital stay and a higher complication rate than those treated with laparoscopic appendectomy.Conclusions The minimally invasive laparoscopic technique is safe and efficacious. It should be the initial procedure of choice for most cases of complicated appendicitis.Presented at the Canadian Association of General Surgeons meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 18 September 2003     

Laparoscopically assisted appendectomy

Summary BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is probably the most common problem in pediatric surgery. METHODS: Report on first case of single port laparoscopically assisted extracorporeal appendectomy in Croatia. RESULTS: In this technique, the appendix is delivered to the surface through the working port, and appendectomy is carried out extracorporeally. In keeping with recent publications, our experience is encouraging. Superior cosmetic result and lower operative stress are advantages compared to open surgery; shorter procedure and reduced cost are advantages compared to conventional laparoscopic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Experience with single port laparoscopically assisted extracorporeal appendectomy is in keeping with published data.      

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: a randomized controlled trial from a developing country

Background

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency. This study was conducted to compare the outcome in terms of duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and wound infection rate following laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children with acute appendicitis.

Nationwide management of perforated pediatric appendicitis: Interval versus same-admission appendectomy

PurposeAlthough conservative management followed by readmission for interval appendectomy is commonly used to manage perforated appendicitis, many studies are limited to individual or noncompeting pediatric hospitals. This study sought to compare national outcomes following interval or same-admission appendectomy in children with perforated appendicitis.MethodsThe Nationwide Readmission Database was queried (2010–2014) for patients <18 years old with perforated appendicitis who underwent appendectomy using ICD9-CM Diagnosis codes. A propensity score-matched analysis (PSMA) utilizing 33 covariates between those with (Interval Appendectomy) and without a prior admission (Same-Admission Appendectomy) was performed to examine postoperative outcomes.ResultsThere were 63,627 pediatric patients with perforated appendicitis. 1014 (1%) had a prior admission for perforated appendicitis within one calendar year undergoing interval appendectomy compared to 62,613 (99%) Same-Admission appendectomy patients. The Interval Appendectomy group was more likely to receive a laparoscopic (87% vs. 78% same-admission) than open (13% vs. 22% same-admission; p < 0.001) operation. Patients receiving interval appendectomy were more likely to have their laparoscopic procedure converted to open (5% vs. 3%) and receive more concomitant procedures. PSMA demonstrated a higher rate of small bowel obstruction in those receiving Same-Admission appendectomy while all other complications were similar. Although those receiving Interval Appendectomy had a shorter index length of stay (LOS) and lower admission costs, they incurred an additional $8044 [$5341-$13,190] from their prior admission.ConclusionPatients treated with interval appendectomy experienced more concomitant procedures and incurred higher combined hospitalization costs while still having a similar postoperative complication profile compared to those receiving same-admission appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.Level of evidenceIII.Type of studyRetrospective Comparative Study.     

Laparoscopic versus standard appendectomy outcomes and cost comparisons in the private sector

Minimally invasive surgery has been proposed as the preferred treatment strategy for various gastrointestinal disorders due to shorter hospital stay, less pain, quicker return to normal activities, and improved cosmesis. However, these advantages may not be straightforward for laparoscopic appendectomy, and optimal management of remains controversial. One hundred forty-eight patients with clinical and radiologic diagnoses of acute appendicitis treated in two different hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-eight patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy in hospital A and 70 patients underwent standard appendectomy in hospital B. Patients treated by either type of surgery were compared in terms of clinical and pathologic features, operation characteristics, complications, and costs. There were no significant differences between both groups in terms of clinical features, radiologic studies, complications, and final pathology findings (P > .05). Hospital stay was significantly shorter and bowel movements recovered quicker in the laparoscopy group. However, overall and operating room costs were significantly higher in patients treated by laparoscopy (P < .01). Our series show a subtle difference in terms of hospital stay and bowel movement recovery, favoring patients treated by laparoscopy. However, these results have to be carefully examined and weighed, because overall costs and operating room costs were significantly higher in the laparoscopy group. Presented at the Forty-Sixth Annual Meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Chicago, Illinois, May 14–18, 2005 (oral presentation).     

Interval laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis complicated by pylephlebitis.

BACKGROUND: Although rare, portal mesenteric venous thrombosis and pylephlebitis remain potential life-threatening sequelae of ruptured appendicitis in children. Treatment recommendations from recent reports have included urgent exploratory laparotomy with appendectomy, prolonged intravenous antibiotic therapy, and anticoagulation for up to a year. METHODS: This report describes successful management of pylephlebitis and mesenteric venous thrombosis complicating ruptured appendicitis with intravenous antibiotics and anticoagulation followed by interval laparoscopic appendectomy. RESULTS: A previously healthy 5-year-old girl was diagnosed with ruptured appendicitis complicated by pylephlebitis and mesenteric venous thrombosis at the time of presentation. She was treated with intravenous antibiotics and anticoagulated for 3 months. She subsequently underwent interval laparoscopic appendectomy. At 3-year follow-up, she is healthy without evidence of adverse sequelae. DISCUSSION: This is the first reported case of successful, minimally invasive management of ruptured appendicitis complicated by mesenteric venous thrombosis and pylephlebitis. CONCLUSION: Similar treatment of other children with this rare presentation seems reasonable.     

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in acute appendicitis: A randomized prospective study

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe and effective procedure, as both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool. It seems to be more effective than the corresponding open procedure. Aim of this study is to evaluate a group of patients randomly allocated either to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) or to open appendectomy (OA). Methods: From January 1998 to December 2002, 252 consecutive and nonselected patients, 155 women and 97 men, were randomized either to LA or OA. Recorded data were operative time, postoperative length, of stay and complications. Results: Mean operative time was 45 min (range 30–120) for OA and 36 min (25–60) for LA, mean postoperative stay was 5.5 days (4–12) for OA and 3.4 days (2–8) for LA. Complication occurred in 20 patients (14.5%) for OA and in four patients (2.6%) for LA. Conclusion: We believe that LA is effective in any kind of clinical situation, with low traumatic impact and best comfort for the patient.     

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.     

Impact of previous abdominal surgery on laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis

Background Laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the most commonly performed laparoscopic procedures. Impact of previous abdominal surgery on laparoscopic appendectomy has not been previously reported. Methods From January 2001 to December 2005, 2029 patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis underwent laparoscopic surgery in our hospital. Of these, 234 patients (11.5%) were found to have other pathology by intraoperative or histologic findings and were excluded from the study. The 1795 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis were divided into three groups: group 1, patients without a history of previous abdominal surgery (n = 1652, 92%); group 2, patients with a history of upper abdominal surgery (n = 20, 1.1%); group 3, patients with a history of lower abdominal surgery (n = 123, 6.8%). Data were collected retrospectively by chart review and analyzed for conversion rate, operative time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and hospital stay. Results Of the 1795 patients, 13 (0.7%) were converted to open appendectomy because of technical difficulty. Overall mean operative time was 57.2 (range, 20–225) min. There was no mortality or intraoperative complications. Overall postoperative complication rate was 10.7% (n = 193): rate of surgical wound infection was 8.2 % (n = 147), surgical wound seroma 1.3% (n = 24), and intra-abdominal abscess 0.8% (n = 14). Overall postoperative hospital stay averaged 3.2 (range, 0–39) days. There were no significant differences between the three groups regarding the conversion rate (0.8% vs. 0% vs. 0%, p = 0.567), operative time (57.3 vs. 55.8 vs. 56.9 min, p = 0.962), postoperative complication rates (10.7 vs. 10 vs. 12.2%, p = 0.863), and hospital stay (3.2 vs. 3.6 vs. 3.1 days, p = 0.673). Conclusions Previous abdominal surgery, whether upper or lower abdominal, has no significant impact on laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.     

Treatment of suspected acute perforated appendicitis with antibiotics and interval appendectomy

Background

Initial antibiotics with planned interval appendectomy (interval AP) have been used to treat patients with complicated perforated appendicitis; however, little experience exists with this approach in children with suspected acute perforated appendicitis (SAPA). We sought to determine the outcome of initial antibiotics and interval AP in children with SAPA.

Methods

Over an 18-month period, 751 consecutive patients underwent appendectomy including 105 patients with SAPA who were treated with initial intravenous antibiotics and planned interval AP ≥ 8 weeks after presentation. All SAPA patients had symptoms for ≤ 96 hours. Primary outcome variables were rates of readmission, abscess formation, and need for interval AP prior to the planned ≥ 8 weeks.

Results

Intraabdominal abscess rate was 27%. Appendectomy prior to planned interval AP was 11% and readmission occurred in 34%. All patients underwent eventual appendectomy with pathologic confirmation confirming the previous appendiceal inflammation. White blood cell (WBC) count > 15,000, WBC > 15,000 plus fecalith on imaging, and WBC > 15,000 plus duration of symptoms > 48 hours were all significantly associated with higher rates of readmission (p = 0.01, p = 0.04, p = 0.02) and need for interval AP prior to the planned ≥ 8 weeks (p = 0.003, p = 0.05, p = 0.03).

Conclusions

Treatment of SAPA with antibiotics and planned interval AP is successful in the majority of patients; however, complications such as abscess formation and/or readmission prior to planned interval AP occur in up to one-third of patients. Certain clinical variables are associated with increased treatment complications.     

腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗腹部手术史急性阑尾炎的临床研究

目的探讨腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗腹部手术史急性阑尾炎的的可行性及临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年2月-2012年6月行腹腔镜手术治疗的253例急性阑尾炎患者的临床资料,其中无腹部手术史患者177例（无手术史组）,腹部手术史患者76例（手术史组）,比较两组患者的中转开腹率、手术时间、术中失血量、肠功能恢复时间、并发症发生率、术后住院时间。结果无手术史组和手术史组的中转开腹率分别是1．7％和1．3％（P〉0．05）,手术时间分别是（40．5±12．3）min和（62．6±14．2）min（P〈0．05）。两组的术中失血量、肠功能恢复时间、术后并发症发生率及术后住院时间的差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论腹部手术史使腹腔镜阑尾切除术的手术时间延长,但对手术疗效无明显影响,提示腹腔镜手术治疗腹部手术史急性阑尾炎安全、有效,且仍具有创伤小、恢复快的优势。     

Comparison of clinical and histopathological features of patients who underwent incidental or emergency appendectomy

BACKGROUND Incidental appendectomy can be defined as the removal of a clinically normal appendix during another surgical procedure unrelated to appendicitis or other appendicular diseases.AIM To compare the demographic, biochemical, and histopathological features of the patients who underwent incidental and standard appendectomy.METHODS The demographic, biochemical, and histopathological data of 72 patients(Incidental App group) who underwent incidental appendectomy during living donor hepatectomy at our Liver Transplant Center between June 2009 and December 2016 were compared with data of 288 patients(Acute App group) who underwent appendectomy for presumed acute appendicitis. The Incidental App group was matched at random in a 1:4 ratio with the Acute App group in the same time frame. Appendectomy specimens of both groups were re-evaluated by two experienced pathologists.RESULTS Statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of age(P= 0.044), white blood cell count(P 0.001), neutrophil(P 0.001), lymphocyte(P 0.001), red cell distribution width(P = 0.036), mean corpuscular hemoglobin(P= 0.001), bilirubin(P = 0.002), appendix width(P 0.001), and presence of acute appendicitis histopathologically(P 0.001). However, no statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of gender, platelet, mean platelet volume, mean corpuscular volume, platelet distribution width, appendix length. While the most common histopathological findings in the Incidental App group were normal appendix vermiformis(72.2%), fibrous obliteration(9.7%)and acute appendicitis(6.9%), the most common histopathological findings in the Acute App group were non-perforated acute appendicitis(62.8%), perforated appendicitis(16.7%), lymphoid hyperplasia(8.3%), and appendix vermiformis(6.3%).CONCLUSION Careful inspection of the entire abdominal cavity is useful for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery such as donor hepatectomy. We think that experience is parallel to the surgeon's foresight, and we should not hesitate to perform incidental appendectomy when necessary     

Modified laparoscopic appendectomy in surgery

Summary Laparoscopic appendectomy, introduced in gynecology by Semm in 1982, has been modified and practiced in our surgical ward since May 1987 in more than 450 patients suffering from all stages of acute and chronic vermix diseases. We report our data on the first series of 388 operations, in which we had the encouraging experience that laparoscopic appendectomy is a practicable and reasonable alternative to routine surgery.     

Complicated appendicitis in children: a clear role for drainage and delayed appendectomy

INTRODUCTION: Children presenting with complicated appendicitis represent a common and challenging problem. Conflicting data exist concerning optimal treatment of these patients with primary versus delayed appendectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all children undergoing appendectomy over a 5-year period was performed. RESULTS: We identified 1,106 children: 360 had evidence of perforation and 92 had an intra-abdominal abscess or right lower quadrant phlegmon. Of these 92, 60 underwent primary appendectomy and 32 underwent drainage and/or antibiotic therapy with delayed appendectomy. Children undergoing delayed appendectomy had a longer prodrome of symptoms (6.9 vs 4.6 days, P = .002), slightly higher presenting white blood cell count (19.3 vs 16.6, P = .08), and had the same hospital length of stay, yet had a lower complication rate requiring readmission to the hospital (0% vs 10%) compared to those undergoing immediate appendectomy. CONCLUSION: In children presenting with prolonged symptoms and a discrete appendiceal abscess or phlegmon, drainage and delayed appendectomy should be the treatment of choice.     

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.     

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.     

适于基层医院开展的改良腹腔镜阑尾切除术(附390例报告)

目的探讨适于基层医院开展的改良腹腔镜阑尾切除术(laparoscopic appendectomy,LA)的应用技术。方法2009年12月～2012年1月采用适宜的麻醉方式、规范化三孔法操作、阑尾系膜单极电凝、自制简易圈套器结扎阑尾根部、自制标本袋阑尾取出等改良的LA技术操作,行LA 390例。结果 390例均成功完成LA,无一例中转开腹。手术时间15～120 min,平均30 min。术后病理:急性单纯性阑尾炎102例,急性化脓性阑尾炎199例,慢性阑尾炎58例,穿孔坏疽性阑尾炎25例,阑尾周围脓肿6例。异位阑尾16例:肝下2例,盲肠壁内3例,腹膜后位8例,盆腔低位3例;微型短小阑尾1例。390例术后随访2～24个月,平均6个月,无出血、肠瘘、肠粘连梗阻等并发症。结论改良的LA适于基层医院开展。     

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.