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.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy in children with perforated appendicitis

PURPOSE: There is persistent controversy regarding the optimal surgical therapy for children with appendicitis. We have recently adopted laparoscopic appendectomy in lieu of the open technique for children with perforated appendicitis. We hypothesized that laparoscopic appendectomy would be as effective as open appendectomy in preventing postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of children admitted to our hospital over a 5-year period with the diagnosis of perforated appendicitis. Patients were divided into two groups based on the operative approach: laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy. Demographic data, duration of presenting symptoms, initial white blood cell (WBC) count, length of stay, and complications were abstracted. Data were compared using appropriate statistical analyses. RESULTS: There was no difference between the laparoscopic (n = 43) and open (n = 77) groups with respect to gender, duration of presenting symptoms, initial WBC, or length of stay. However, patients in the laparoscopic group had a significantly lower complication rate than those in the open group (6/43 vs. 23/77, P = 0.05). Infectious complications were no different between groups. Patients in the laparoscopic group tended to be older than patients in the open group (10.6 +/- 3.3 years vs. 8.5 +/- 4.1 years, P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy for children with perforated appendicitis has the same infectious complication rate and a lower overall complication rate than open appendectomy. A prospective study with standardized postoperative care would be needed to determine whether laparoscopic appendectomy for children with perforated appendicitis is the treatment of choice, but until then it remains an attractive alternative.     

Comparison of laparoscopic, open, and converted appendectomy for perforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND: Perforated appendicitis is associated with a significant risk of postoperative abdominal and wound infection. Only a few controversial studies evaluate the role of laparoscopy in perforated appendicitis. The significance of conversion from laparoscopy to open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis is not well defined. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test. METHODS: Data on 52 patients with perforated appendicitis were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. Among these patients, 18 had laparoscopic appendectomies (LA); 24 had open appendectomies (OA); and 10 had converted appendectomies (CA). The indications for either method were based on the attending surgeons's philosophy. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed using a retrograde stapler technique. Operative time, hospital stay, ability to tolerate a liquid diet, and postoperative infectious complications were documented. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in the operative time in minutes was found between the LA (114 +/- 29.3), CA (120.0 +/- 32.2), and OA (105.8 +/- 64.1) groups (p = NS). There was no statistically significance difference in length of stay (days) between the LA (9.2 +/- 4.1), OA (10.5 +/- 3.3), and CA (10.0 +/- 1.8) groups. The wound infection rate was less frequent in the LA group (0%) than in 0A (14%) and CA (10%) groups. The rate of intra-abdominal abscess infections (IAAs) and ileus were 22% and 28%, respectively, in LA group, 38% and 29%, respectively, in OA group, and 60% and 50%, respectively, in CA group. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses exists between laparoscopic and open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. Wound infections and ileus complicate the postoperative course of patients after laparoscopic appendectomy less frequently than after open appendectomy. The conversion of laparoscopic to open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis is associated with increased postoperative morbidity.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy for simple and complicated appendicitis in children--safe or risky procedure

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to present our experience and to assess the advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy, particularly in children with perforated appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1999 and 2005, 505 laparoscopic appendectomies were performed. In children aged between 2 and 18 years, number, sex, age, histologic type of appendicitis, additional surgical procedures, number and type of complications, time of procedure, and hospitalization were analyzed. RESULTS: There was no need for conversion even in perforated appendicitis and in technically difficult cases. In 21 (4.16%) children in postoperative period minor complications occurred. Average operating time was 43 minutes. Average hospital stay was 2.4 days. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy is good alternative for classic appendectomy, irrespective of the degree of inflammation. Accurate cleaning and rinsing of the abdominal cavity essentially decreases the quantity of complications even in cases with perforated appendicitis. This suggests the expansion of indications toward laparoscopic appendectomy in case of all children with acute appendicitis.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis: a comparison with open appendectomy

Background The role of laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis remains controversial. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy outcomes for children with perforated appendicitis. Methods Over a 36-month period, 111 children with perforated appendicitis were analyzed in a retrospective review. These children were treated with either laparoscopic (n = 59) or open appendectomy. The primary outcome measures were operative time, length of hospital stay, time to adequate oral intake, wound infection, intraabdominal abscess formation, and bowel obstruction. Results The demographic data, presenting symptoms, preoperative laboratory values, and operative times (laparoscopic group, 61 ± 3 min; open group, 57 ± 3 were similar for the two groups (p = 0.3). The time to adequate oral intake was 104 ± 7 h for the laparoscopic group and 127 ± 12 h for the open group (p = 0.08). The hospitalization time was 189 ± 14 h for the laparoscopic group, as compared with 210 ± 15 h for the open group (p = 0.3). The wound infection rate was 6.8% for the laparoscopic group and 23% for the open group (p < 0.05). The wounds of another 29% of the patients were left open at the time of surgery. The postoperative intraabdominal abscess formation rate was 13.6% for the laparoscopic group and 15.4% for the open group. One patient in each group experienced bowel obstruction. Conclusions Laparoscopic appendectomy for the children with perforated appendicitis in this study was associated with a significant decrease in the rate of wound infection. Furthermore, on the average, the children who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy tolerated enteral feedings and were discharged from the hospital approximately 24 h earlier than those who had open appendectomy.     

Laparoscopy should be the approach of choice for acute appendicitis in the morbidly obese

BACKGROUND: The current study compared the outcome of morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open appendectomy. METHODS: We obtained data from the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) database on 1,943 morbidly obese patients who underwent appendectomy for acute or perforated appendicitis between 2002 and 2007. RESULTS: Compared to open appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter length of stay (3 vs 4 days) and a lower overall complication rate (9% vs 17%). Most notably, a lower rate of wound infection was noted (1% vs 3%). Within a subset analysis of morbidly obese patients who underwent appendectomy for perforated appendicitis, there was a higher overall complication rate (27% vs 18%) and cost ($16,600 vs $12,300) in the open appendectomy group. CONCLUSION: In the morbidly obese, laparoscopic appendectomy performed for acute and perforated appendicitis is associated with a shorter length of stay and lower morbidity and costs. Laparoscopic appendectomy should be the procedure of choice for the treatment of acute appendicitis in the morbidly obese population.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy is an acceptable alternative for the treatment of perforated appendicitis

Background: Ever since laparoscopy was first applied to the treatment of appendicitis, a controversy has existed as to whether the acknowledged benefits of a minimally invasive approach warrant its preference over the conventional treatment, which historically has had relatively low morbidity. The purpose of this study was to determine if laparoscopic appendectomy should be performed preferentially in cases where surgeons are not limited by technical constraints. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of 112 patients operated on for suspected appendicitis from June 1995 to July 1996. Forty-eight patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, and 64 had conventional open appendectomy. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed using a three-trocar technique and the endoscopic stapler. Results: The histopathological diagnosis of appendicitis was confirmed in 82.6% of cases. Overall, laparoscopic appendectomy reduced length of hospital stay (1.54 versus 4.09 days; p < 0.0001) compared to conventional open appendectomy, with no significant difference in hospital cost ($6430 versus $6669; p= ns). Although the total OR time was longer in the laparoscopic group (75.8 versus 60.2 min; p < 0.0001), laparoscopy resulted in both a reduction in length of stay (2.17 versus 6.27 days; p < 0.0001) and hospital cost ($7506 versus $10,504; p < 0.02) for cases of perforated appendicitis. Conversion to open appendectomy was performed in 6% of patients, all of whom had perforated appendicitis. Conclusions: Our data suggest that most cases of acute appendicitis with suspected perforation could be managed laparoscopically. Laparoscopic appendectomy significantly reduces length of stay and hospital costs in patients with perforated appendicitis. Received: 3 April 1997/Accepted: 19 August 1997     

Intra-abdominal abscesses following laparoscopic and open appendectomies

Recent findings in a small number of studies have suggested a trend toward increased infectious complications following laparoscopic appendectomy. The purpose of the present review was to evaluate the incidence of postappendectomy intra-abdominal abscess formation following laparoscopic and open appendectomies. Using the surgical database of the Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center, we reviewed the records of all appendectomies performed at the center between March 1993 and September 1995. Incidental appendectomies as well as appendectomies in pediatric patients under the age of 18 years were excluded. A total of 2497 appendectomies were identified; indications for these procedures included acute appendicitis in 1422 cases (57%), gangrenous appendicitis in 289 (12%), and perforated appendicitis in 786 (31%). The intraoperative diagnosis made by the surgeon was used for classification. A two-tailedP value of <0.05 was considered significant. There was no significant difference in the rate of abscess formation between the groups undergoing open and laparoscopic appendectomies for acute and gangrenous appendicitis. In patients with perforated appendicitis, a total of 26 postappendectomy intra-abdominal abscesses occurred following 786 appendectomies for an over-all abscess formation rate of 3.3%. Eighteen abscesses occurred following 683 open appendectomies (2.6%), six abscesses occurred following 67 laparoscopic appendectomies (9.0%), and the remaining two abscesses occurred following 36 converted cases (5.6%). For perforated appendicitis, however, there was a statistically significant increase in the rate of abscess formation following laparoscopic appendectomy compared to conventional open appendectomy (9.0% vs. 2.6%,P=0.015). There was no significant difference in the rate of abscess formation between open vs. converted cases or between laparoscopic vs. converted cases. A comparison of the length of the postoperative hospital stay showed no significant difference between open and laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis (6.1 days vs. 5.9 days). Laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis is associated with a higher rate of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess formation without the benefit of a shortened hospital stay. Given these findings, laparoscopic appendectomy is not recommended in patients with perforated appendicitis. Presented at the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, San Francisco, Calif., May 19–22, 1996.     

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.     

Perforated Appendicitis: Is Laparoscopy Safe?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy in children with perforated appendicitis. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of consecutive patients under the age of 18, operated on for perforated appendicitis between September 1997 and December 1999. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were operated on for perforated appendicitis. Eleven appendectomies were performed laparoscopically. Fifty-four patients underwent an open appendectomy. Four laparoscopic appendectomies were converted to an open procedure. The mean operative time was 79 minutes for the laparoscopic group, and 87 minutes for the open group. The mean length of hospital stay was 5.4 days versus 7.6 days for the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively. Neither of these differences was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The above data support the use of laparoscopy in the management of perforated appendicitis in children. In conclusion, laparoscopy is as safe as open appendectomy. Laparoscopy is an effective alternative with a shorter length of hospital stay compared with that for an open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in children.     

Appendectomy in the pre- and postlaparoscopic eras

The role of laparoscopic appendectomy remains controversial since many authors have suggested that overall morbidity is primarily a function of the degree of appendicitis rather than the operative approach. We have reviewed our appendectomy experience to determine the advantages and/or disadvantages of the laparoscopic technique in cases of acute appendicitis, and furthermore to ascertain whether the extent of disease should affect the surgical approach used. Data were accumulated for all 1158 patients who underwent appendectomy at a single institution during the following three time periods that span the pre- and postlaparoscopic eras: period I (1987 to 1990), period II (1991 to 1993), and period III (1994 to 1997). Cases were categorized with regard to pathologic findings and operative approach (i.e., open or laparoscopic appendectomy). The percentage of appendectomies performed laparoscopically increased with time (0%, 27%, and 79% for periods I, II, and III, respectively). Overall, the total operating room time was slightly shorter for laparoscopic compared to open appendectomy (99 vs. 102 minutes; P <0.05). Operating room times for open appendectomy remained unchanged, but the times for laparoscopic appendectomy decreased from period II to period III (119 to 94 minutes; P <0.001). In cases of gangrenous/perforated appendicitis, the times for laparoscopic appendectomy were significantly shorter than those for open appendectomy (98/115 vs. 120/125 minutes; P <0.001 for both). Overall, the hospital stay was shorter for patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (1.63 vs. 4.21 days; P <0.001), and the difference was maintained in all three time periods. The differences in length of hospital stay for laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy were most dramatic in gangrenous/perforated cases (1.8/3.0 vs. 4.0/9.0 days; P <0.001), whereas there was only a slight difference in cases of simple appendicitis, for example, 1.6 vs. 2.1 days (laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy, period III). There was a significant decrease in the percentage of perforated cases in which surgical treatment had been delayed (>8 hours) (21%, 5%, and 5%) over the three time periods, but the rate of "negative" appendectomies was similar (10%, 8%, and 8%). The complication rates following laparoscopic and open appendectomies during period II were 5.4% and 7.5%, respectively (P >0.05). Laparoscopic appendectomy results in a marked decrease in the length of hospital stay and similar postoperative morbidity compared to open appendectomy. In cases of gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy appears to be especially worthwhile in regard to both operating room time and hospital stay. Presented at the Thirty-Ninth Annual Meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, New Orleans, La., May 17–20, 1998. Supported by the Harvard Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery.     

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.     

Fifty-five consecutive laparoscopic appendectomy procedures without conversion.

BACKGROUND: In patients with suspected appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy is gaining increasing acceptance primarily because it is associated with less postoperative pain and a shorter hospital stay. Experience with 55 consecutive laparoscopic appendectomies, performed without conversion by the same surgeon, is herein examined and analyzed. METHODS: The medical records of 55 consecutive patients with suspected appendicitis who underwent laparoscopic exploration (from 2000 to 2002) were analyzed for demographic information, clinical findings, laboratory/computed tomography scan results, intraoperative diagnosis, clinicopathologic correlation, complications, incidental findings, and operative time. RESULTS: Twenty-six males (47%) and 24 females (53%) underwent surgery. Mean age was 25.2 years (range, 6 years to 67 years). Computerized tomography scans obtained in 37 cases (74%) had a sensitivity of 86.7% and a specificity of 62.5%. Average length of stay was 2.3 days (median, 1 day). Average operating room time was 69 minutes (range, 40 to 173 minutes). Five patients experienced postoperative complications: 2 had intraperitoneal abscesses, 1 had urinary retention, and 2 had postoperative ileus. No operative conversions or postoperative wound infections occurred. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy confirmed the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and allowed the safe, effective treatment of both complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis with minimal hospitalization, recovery and convalescent times, and zero open conversion and wound infections. Laparoscopic appendectomy is advocated as the procedure of choice for patients with clinically suspected appendicitis.     

Perforated appendicitis is not a contraindication to laparoscopy.

Recent studies have reported an increased risk of intra-abdominal abscess formation following laparoscopic operation for perforated appendicitis. We undertook this study to compare laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in the treatment of perforated appendicitis. Records of all patients undergoing an appendectomy between January 1994 and June 1997 were reviewed, classifying appendicitis as acute, gangrenous, or perforated based on the intraoperative findings. Operative procedures were categorized as open, laparoscopic converted to open, or laparoscopic. The study group included 690 patients; four hundred fourteen (60%) were acute, 77 (11%) were gangrenous, and 199 (29%) were perforated. Although mean length of stay was shorter for all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy, patients with perforated appendicitis had similar length of stay between treatment groups. Mean operative time for open appendectomy was significantly shorter than for converted or laparoscopic appendectomy regardless of diagnosis (P<0.01). Ten patients (1.4%) developed an intra-abdominal abscess: six after open appendectomy (1.7%), one after converted appendectomy (3.7%), and three after laparoscopic appendectomy (1%). There was no significant difference in rate of abscess formation in patients with perforated appendicitis undergoing open, converted, or laparoscopic appendectomy. We conclude that laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis is not associated with an increased rate of intra-abdominal abscess formation.     

Intra-abdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis

HYPOTHESIS: The incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess is higher after laparoscopic compared with open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. METHODS: A historical cohort study of pediatric patients operated on for suspected appendicitis by open appendectomy or laparoscopic appendectomy compares the incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess for each procedure. SETTING: A tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Five hundred thirty-eight pediatric patients were operated on for suspected appendicitis at our institution between 1974 and 1999. Of these, 453 were included in the study. Of the excluded patients, 9 had incomplete medical records, 69 had normal or interval appendectomies, and 7 had appendixes removed by methods other than laparoscopy or right lower quadrant incision. INTERVENTIONS: Open appendectomy performed through a right lower quadrant incision or laparoscopic appendectomy performed through a 3-trocar approach by 1 of 3 pediatric surgeons at our institution. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess after laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. RESULTS: In perforated appendicitis (170 patients), the incidence of postoperative abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy was 24% vs 4.2% after open appendectomy. The relative risk ratio of developing a postoperative abscess after perforated appendicitis was 5.6 (confidence interval, 2.1-16.0) after laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. The results remained significant when controlled for age, sex, intraoperative irrigation, and preoperative antibiotics. Postoperative abscess in all acute, gangrenous, and perforated appendicitis after laparoscopic appendectomy was 6.4% vs 3.0% after open appendectomy. This was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: There is a significant increase in the incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess with perforated appendicitis after laparoscopic compared with open appendectomy in pediatric patients.     

Interval laparoscopic appendectomy in children

BACKGROUND: Conservative management of advanced complicated appendicitis in children is becoming more common. Formation of an appendiceal mass or abscess may mitigate against urgent appendectomy during the acute stage, and conservative treatment followed by interval appendectomy has been advocated. We present our experience of interval laparoscopic appendectomy in our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All children who were offered interval laparoscopic appendectomy between January 2000 and December 2004 were included. Retrospective case note analysis was performed and data collected included demographics, duration of symptoms, method of diagnosis, days of antibiotics, length of interval, operative time, length of hospital stay (conservative treatment and interval laparoscopic appendectomy), analgesia requirements, complications, and histology. RESULTS: Thirty-six children, median age 8 years (range, 1-15 years) diagnosed with appendiceal mass or abscess were offered interval laparoscopic appendectomy by two surgeons in our institution: one patient declined interval laparoscopic appendectomy. Median antibiotic treatment was 10 days (range, 3-23 days). Median length of stay for conservative treatment was 6 days (range, 1-27 days). Five children required percutaneous drainage. For the 35 children who had interval laparoscopic appendectomy, the median interval was 93 days (range, 34-156 days) and median operative time was 55 minutes (range, 25-120 minutes). Median length of stay for interval laparoscopic appendectomy was 1 day (range, 1-3 days). There were no complications following interval laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Interval laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed in children, is associated with a short hospital stay and minimal morbidity, analgesia, and scarring following conservative management of appendiceal mass or abscess. Interval laparoscopic appendectomy eliminates the risk of recurrent appendicitis and serves to excise undiagnosed carcinoid tumors. In future it may be possible to perform interval laparoscopic appendectomy as a day-case procedure in selected patients.     

Results of laparoscopic treatment of complicated appendicitis

Laparoscopic appendectomy in children is a generally accepted procedure for the treatment of non-complicated acute appendicitis. Nevertheless, the role of laparoscopy in complicated cases is controversial. We show our experience with 40 cases of complicated acute appendicitis treated by means laparoscopy between February 2000 and October 2002. In every case we used 3 ports, one umbilical and the other two in both lower quadrants. The appendix was gangrenous in 31 patients and in the other 9 was perforated. Appendectomy was performed in an extracorporeal way in most of the cases. Average surgical time was 71 minutes and mean hospital stay was 8.8 days. Intraoperative complications occurred in 8 cases (20%) and postoperative complications were observed in 9 patients (22.5%). Four patients were reoperated (2 open and 2 laparoscopic) in order to drain two abscesses and treat two obstructions. The results of this serie is compared with another group of 40 complicated appendicitis operated in a classic open way in the same period of time. Postoperative complications were less often in the laparoscopic group. Oral intake, need for analgesia and hospital stay are more favorable in the laparoscopic group.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: indications and current use.

Laparoscopic evaluation was performed in 43 consecutive patients with right lower abdominal pain and preoperative diagnosis of possible appendicitis. Patients with generalized peritonitis and evidence of perforation of the appendix were not considered for laparoscopy. Visualization was sufficient for making a diagnosis in 97.7% of the cases. In 95%, laparoscopic findings were compatible with the pathology report. Thirty-five patients underwent successful laparoscopic appendectomy with neither intraoperative nor postoperative complications. No further surgery was required; slightly elevated temperatures in 6 patients responded to treatment with antibiotics, and there were no wound infections. Laparoscopic appendectomy is minimally invasive and results in less postoperative pain and morbidity and fewer adhesions and other long-term sequelae than conventional laparotomy. It is associated with superior cosmetic results, a shorter hospital stay, and faster return to normal activities. This experience suggests that if there is no evidence that the appendix is perforated or that generalized peritonitis exists and if qualified physicians and adequate facilities are available, patients presenting with right lower quadrant abdominal pain and possible appendicitis are best evaluated and treated with laparoscopic technique.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy. Initial experience in a teaching program.

From February 1990 to December 1991, 16 laparoscopic procedures were performed for right lower quadrant pain. There were nine men and seven women, aged 16 to 47 years (mean, 27.2 years). All procedures were performed by surgical chief residents with prior experience in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, first-assisted by an attending surgeon. The appendix was visualized and a definitive diagnosis was made in all patients. One patient with acute salpingitis underwent diagnostic laparoscopy only; two patients underwent laparotomy (perforated appendicitis, perforated diverticulitis). A fourth patient had an acute torsion of an ovarian cyst managed laparoscopically. Laparoscopic appendectomy was successfully performed in 12 patients (acute appendicitis, 9; fibrosis or chronic inflammation, 2; normal appendix, 1). Mean operative time for laparoscopic appendectomy was 95.7 minutes, and mean postoperative stay was 2.5 days. The authors conclude that operative time, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates for laparoscopic appendectomy are acceptable. Within the context of a training program, laparoscopic appendectomy provides an opportunity for surgical residents to expand laparoscopic skills.     

Open versus laparoscopic appendectomy. A prospective randomized comparison.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compare open and laparoscopic appendectomy in a randomized fashion with regard to length of operation, complications, hospital stay, and recovery time. METHODS: Adult patients (older than 14 years of age) with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized to either open or laparoscopic appendectomy over a 9-month period. All patients received preoperative antibiotics. The operative time was calculated as beginning with the incision and ending when the wound was fully closed. Patients that were converted from laparoscopic to open appendectomy were considered a separate group. Return to normal activity and work were determined by questioning during postoperative clinic, telephone, or mailed questionnaire. RESULTS: There was a total of 169 patients randomized, 88 to the open and 81 to the laparoscopic group. The groups were similar demographically. Of the 81 laparoscopic patients, 13 (16%) were converted to open. In the open group, 70 patients (79.5%) had acute appendicitis and 21 (23.9%) had perforative appendicitis. In the laparoscopic group, 62 patients (76.5%) had acute appendicitis and 10 (12.3%) had perforative appendicitis. There was no statistical difference in the return to activity or work between the laparoscopic and open groups. The operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (102.2 minutes vs. 81.7 minutes, p < 0.01). The hospital stay of 2.2 days in the laparoscopic group and 4.3 days in the open group was statistically (p = 0.007). There was no difference in the hospital stay for those with acute appendicitis (1.89 days vs. 2.61 days, p = 0.067) compared with those with a normal appendix but with pelvic inflammatory disease (1.1 days vs. 2.3 days, p = 0.11). There was a significant difference in patients with perforative appendicitis (1.5 days vs. 9.5 days, p < 0.01). The hospital cost for patients having laparoscopic appendectomy was $6077 and for an open appendectomy $7227 (p = 0.164). There were no increased complications associated with the laparoscopic technique. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy is comparable to open appendectomy with regard to complications, hospital stay, cost, return to activity, and return to work. There was a greater operative time involved with the laparoscopic technique. Laparoscopic appendectomy does not offer any significant benefit over the open approach for the routine patient with appendicitis.