Literature DB >> 11395821

Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in overweight patients.

L Enochsson1, A Hellberg, C Rudberg, G Fenyö, T Gudbjartsson, E Kullman, I Ringqvist, S Sörensen, J Wenner.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been associated with a faster recovery and less postoperative pain than the open technique. However, few data are available on the clinical outcome of LA in overweight patients.
METHODS: A group of 106 patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 26.4, representing the upper quintile of 500 prospectively randomized patients, were included in the study. They were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic or open appendectomy (OA). Operating and anesthesia times, postoperative pain, complications, hospital stay, functional index (1 week postoperatively), sick leave, and time to full recovery were documented.
RESULTS: In OA, the operating time for overweight patients was significantly longer than that for patients in the normal weight range (40 vs 35 min, p < 0.05). In LA, there was no difference in operating time between the normal and overweight patients. Overweight patients who underwent LA had longer operating and anesthesia times than their OA counterparts (55 vs 40 min, p < 0.001; and 125 vs 100 min, p < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative pain was significantly greater in overweight patients who underwent OA than in those treated with the laparoscopic technique. Postoperative pain was also significantly greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in patients of normal weight after 4 weeks; the clinical significance may, however, be of less importance since the values are low (0.26 vs 0.09, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two operating techniques in terms of complications. Hospital stay was longer for overweight patients than for normal-weight patients undergoing OA (3.0 vs 2.0, p < 0.01). The functional index did not differ between any group of patients. Sick leave was longer for overweight patients who underwent OA than for normal-weight patients treated with the same technique (17 vs 13 days, p < 0.01). In the laparoscopic group, however, there were no differences between the overweight and normal-weight patients. Time to full recovery was greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in the overweight patients in the LA group (22 vs 15 days, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In this study, overweight patients who were submitted to LA had less postoperative pain and a faster postoperative recovery than overweight patients who had OA. LA also abolished some of the negative effects that overweight had on operating time, hospital stay, and sick leave with the open technique. However, anesthesia and operating times were significantly longer in LA for both overweight patients and those with a normal BMI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11395821     DOI: 10.1007/s004640000334

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  14 in total

1.  Ponderal index as a predictor of postoperative complications.

Authors:  V Velanovich
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 0.688

2.  Prevalence of obesity in surgical patients: a comparative survey in the United States and Australia.

Authors:  R H Riley; V Burke
Journal:  J Qual Clin Pract       Date:  1997-09

3.  Randomized controlled trial with sequential design of laparoscopic versus conventional appendicectomy.

Authors:  O Reiertsen; S Larsen; E Trondsen; B Edwin; A E Faerden; A R Rosseland
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Laparoscopic appendectomy: comparison with open appendectomy in 720 patients.

Authors:  K F Richards; K S Fisher; J H Flores; B J Christensen
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1996-06

5.  Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. Prospective randomized study of outcomes.

Authors:  L Minné; D Varner; A Burnell; E Ratzer; J Clark; W Haun
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1997-07

6.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial of 81 patients.

Authors:  R Hart; C Rajgopal; A Plewes; J Sweeney; W Davies; D Gray; B Taylor
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 2.089

7.  Prospective randomized multicentre study of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy.

Authors:  A Hellberg; C Rudberg; E Kullman; L Enochsson; G Fenyö; H Graffner; B Hallerbäck; B Johansson; B Anderberg; J Wenner; I Ringqvist; S Sörensen
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 8.  The risks of surgery in obese patients.

Authors:  P S Pasulka; B R Bistrian; P N Benotti; G L Blackburn
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  G Kazemier; G R de Zeeuw; J F Lange; W C Hop; H J Bonjer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Laparoscopy: the preferred method of cholecystectomy in the morbidly obese.

Authors:  R H Miles; R E Carballo; R A Prinz; M McMahon; G Pulawski; R N Olen; D L Dahlinghaus
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.982

View more
  19 in total

1.  Evidence to support the use of laparoscopic over open appendicectomy for obese individuals: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Benjamin L Woodham; Michael R Cox; Guy D Eslick
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopy for every acute appendicitis?

Authors:  K Slim; J Chipponi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the obese patient: a subset analysis from a prospective, randomized, double-blind study.

Authors:  Tatyan Clarke; Namir Katkhouda; Rodney J Mason; Bon C Cheng; Jaisa Olasky; Helen J Sohn; Ashkan Moazzez; Jeffrey Algra; Eric Chaghouri; Thomas V Berne
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  SAGES guideline for laparoscopic appendectomy.

Authors:  James R Korndorffer; Erika Fellinger; William Reed
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study.

Authors:  Namir Katkhouda; Rodney J Mason; Shirin Towfigh; Anna Gevorgyan; Rahila Essani
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with lower morbidity in extremely obese children.

Authors:  Balazs Kutasy; Manuela Hunziker; Ganapathy Laxamanadass; Prem Puri
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.827

7.  Obesity should not influence the management of appendicitis.

Authors:  S Towfigh; F Chen; N Katkhouda; R Kelso; H Sohn; T V Berne; R J Mason
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-03-18       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xiaohang Li; Jialin Zhang; Lixuan Sang; Wenliang Zhang; Zhiqiang Chu; Xin Li; Yongfeng Liu
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  Laparoscopic appendectomy is the preferred approach for appendicitis: a retrospective review of two practice patterns.

Authors:  Vadim Nakhamiyayev; Lars Galldin; Mario Chiarello; Angela Lumba; Piotr J Gorecki
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: what is the real difference? Results of a prospective randomized double-blinded trial.

Authors:  R C Ignacio; R Burke; D Spencer; C Bissell; C Dorsainvil; P A Lucha
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-12-29       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.