C M Lam1, A W Yuen, B Chik, A C Wai, S T Fan. 1. Central Surgical Audit Unit, Central Coordinating Committee of Surgery, Hospital Authority, Hospital Authority Building, 147B Argyle Street, Kowloon, Hong Kong. lamcm@hkucc.hku.hk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite being controversial in the past, many reports on the safe use of laparoscopic surgery in emergency settings have been published. The aim of this study was to investigate the diffusion of laparoscopic surgery in three common surgical emergency operations, namely, appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and simple repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), in a stable population. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the central database of the Hospital Authority (HA) in Hong Kong. Data for patients managed in 14 HA hospitals from 1998 to 2002 were studied. The operation record and discharge record of each patient were also investigated to verify the data. RESULTS: A total of 12,708 patients underwent appendectomy, 2631 patients underwent cholecystectomy, and 2260 patients had simple repair of PPU performed. During the study period, 37.2% of appendectomies, 46.5% of cholecystectomies, and 23.1% of simple repairs of PPU were performed laparoscopically. More than a two-fold increase in the proportion of laparoscopic surgery was observed in each of these three operations. By the end of 2002, the percentage of laparoscopic surgery had increased to 53.5% for appendectomies, 61.3% for cholecystectomies, and 32.9% for simple repairs of PPU. Significantly lower hospital mortality rates and shorter postoperative hospital stay were consistenty observed in patients with laparoscopic surgery of the three emergencies. A wide variation in the use of laparoscopic surgery, ranging from 3.7% to 73.1%, was observed among the 14 HA hospitals. However, there was no correlation in the use of laparoscopic surgery with the volume of operation performed in each hospital (p = 0.933). CONCLUSION: A high diffusion rate on the use of laparoscopic surgery for common surgical emergency was observed in Hong Kong. However, there was also a wide variation in the diffusion rate among the 14 HA hospitals. Efforts to reduce hospital variation for the better dissemination of safe laparoscopic technique may be warranted.
BACKGROUND: Despite being controversial in the past, many reports on the safe use of laparoscopic surgery in emergency settings have been published. The aim of this study was to investigate the diffusion of laparoscopic surgery in three common surgical emergency operations, namely, appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and simple repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), in a stable population. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the central database of the Hospital Authority (HA) in Hong Kong. Data for patients managed in 14 HA hospitals from 1998 to 2002 were studied. The operation record and discharge record of each patient were also investigated to verify the data. RESULTS: A total of 12,708 patients underwent appendectomy, 2631 patients underwent cholecystectomy, and 2260 patients had simple repair of PPU performed. During the study period, 37.2% of appendectomies, 46.5% of cholecystectomies, and 23.1% of simple repairs of PPU were performed laparoscopically. More than a two-fold increase in the proportion of laparoscopic surgery was observed in each of these three operations. By the end of 2002, the percentage of laparoscopic surgery had increased to 53.5% for appendectomies, 61.3% for cholecystectomies, and 32.9% for simple repairs of PPU. Significantly lower hospital mortality rates and shorter postoperative hospital stay were consistenty observed in patients with laparoscopic surgery of the three emergencies. A wide variation in the use of laparoscopic surgery, ranging from 3.7% to 73.1%, was observed among the 14 HA hospitals. However, there was no correlation in the use of laparoscopic surgery with the volume of operation performed in each hospital (p = 0.933). CONCLUSION: A high diffusion rate on the use of laparoscopic surgery for common surgical emergency was observed in Hong Kong. However, there was also a wide variation in the diffusion rate among the 14 HA hospitals. Efforts to reduce hospital variation for the better dissemination of safe laparoscopic technique may be warranted.
Authors: Ferdinando Agresta; Paolo De Simone; Leonardo Leone; Alberto Arezzo; Antonio Biondi; Luca Bottero; Fausto Catena; Giovanni Conzo; Gianmattia Del Genio; Alberto Fersini; Mario Guerrieri; Giovanni Illomei; Pietro Tonelli; Marco Vitellaro; Giovanni Docimo; Antonio Crucitti Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Wing T Siu; Heng T Leong; Bonita K B Law; Chun H Chau; Anthony C N Li; Kai H Fung; Yuk P Tai; Michael K W Li Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Ulrich Guller; Sheleika Hervey; Harriett Purves; Lawrence H Muhlbaier; Eric D Peterson; Steve Eubanks; Ricardo Pietrobon Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Stavros A Antoniou; George A Antoniou; Oliver O Koch; Rudolph Pointner; Frank A Granderath Journal: JSLS Date: 2013 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Kenneth Thorsen; Tom B Glomsaker; Andreas von Meer; Kjetil Søreide; Jon Arne Søreide Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2011-05-13 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: S Sauerland; F Agresta; R Bergamaschi; G Borzellino; A Budzynski; G Champault; A Fingerhut; A Isla; M Johansson; P Lundorff; B Navez; S Saad; E A M Neugebauer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2005-10-24 Impact factor: 3.453