Arshad M Malik1, Altaf H Talpur, Aziz A Laghari. 1. Department of Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan. arshadhamzapk@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is categorized into intracorporeal appendectomy (ICA) and video-assisted extracorporeal appendectomy (VAECA). This study is conducted to compare feasibility and effectiveness of video-assisted extracorporeal appendectomy (VAECA) with open appendectomy (OA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a comparative descriptive study conducted at the Department of Surgery of Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences (Jamshoro, Pakistan) from June 2003 to November 2007. Two hundred and eighty-three patients of acute appendicitis were included and categorized into two groups: A and B. Group A included 150 (53%) patients operated on by the OA technique, while group B included 133 (47%) patients in whom VAECA was performed. VAECA was accomplished through three ports in the majority of patients (89%), while a few cases (11%) were completed by two ports only. Patients below 10 years of age and with suspected appendicular mass were excluded from the study. Both operative techniques and their merits and demerits were explained to all the patients and, depending upon their choice or by a simple flip of a coin, they were operated on by either of the techniques. A well-informed written consent was also taken from every patient. The results of both the groups were collected on a proforma and were compared in terms of cosmesis, total operative time, operative and postoperative complications, and total duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: The mean operating time was much shorter in group B (p < 0.001), compared to group A patients. The incidence of postoperative infection was comparatively higher in OA, compared to VAECA. The rate of operative complications (p < 0.001), postoperative complications (p < 0.01), and duration of hospital stay (p < 0.001) were all significantly lower in the VAECA group. Cosmetic results were excellent in VAECA, compared to OA, as assessed by length of incision and the postoperative scar formation. CONCLUSION: VAECA can be a good alternate option in simple cases without much adhesions or mass formation.
OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is categorized into intracorporeal appendectomy (ICA) and video-assisted extracorporeal appendectomy (VAECA). This study is conducted to compare feasibility and effectiveness of video-assisted extracorporeal appendectomy (VAECA) with open appendectomy (OA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a comparative descriptive study conducted at the Department of Surgery of Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences (Jamshoro, Pakistan) from June 2003 to November 2007. Two hundred and eighty-three patients of acute appendicitis were included and categorized into two groups: A and B. Group A included 150 (53%) patients operated on by the OA technique, while group B included 133 (47%) patients in whom VAECA was performed. VAECA was accomplished through three ports in the majority of patients (89%), while a few cases (11%) were completed by two ports only. Patients below 10 years of age and with suspected appendicular mass were excluded from the study. Both operative techniques and their merits and demerits were explained to all the patients and, depending upon their choice or by a simple flip of a coin, they were operated on by either of the techniques. A well-informed written consent was also taken from every patient. The results of both the groups were collected on a proforma and were compared in terms of cosmesis, total operative time, operative and postoperative complications, and total duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: The mean operating time was much shorter in group B (p < 0.001), compared to group A patients. The incidence of postoperative infection was comparatively higher in OA, compared to VAECA. The rate of operative complications (p < 0.001), postoperative complications (p < 0.01), and duration of hospital stay (p < 0.001) were all significantly lower in the VAECA group. Cosmetic results were excellent in VAECA, compared to OA, as assessed by length of incision and the postoperative scar formation. CONCLUSION: VAECA can be a good alternate option in simple cases without much adhesions or mass formation.
Authors: Sara Hernandez-Martin; Lidia Ayuso; Ada Yessenia Molina; Javier Pison; Miguel Angel Martinez-Bermejo; Alberto Perez-Martinez Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Thomas Jaschinski; Christoph G Mosch; Michaela Eikermann; Edmund Am Neugebauer; Stefan Sauerland Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-11-28