Samir Delibegović1, Ervin Matović. 1. Department of Surgery, University Clinic Center, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina. delibegovic.samir@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), the standard technique in securing of the base of the appendix is by endoloop ligatures. However, application of the endoloop demands dexterity and a short training, while hem-o-lok clips may be more advantageous to use due to their simplicity of application and low cost. The objective of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and eventual advantages of this way of securing of the base of the appendix. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective study was conducted in the period from August 2006 to August 2008. The patients were divided into two groups; in the first group the base of the appendix was secured by double endoloop ligatures, while in the second group it was done by double nonabsorbable hem-o-lok clips. The data collected included age, gender, operative time, hospital stay, costs, and intra- and postoperative complications. RESULTS: There was no difference in hospital stay between the two groups of patients; mean operative time was 47.1 ± 6.7 min in the first group where the base was secured by endoloop ligatures, and was 38.7 ± 5.0 min in the group where the base was secured by hem-o-lok clips. The cost of the three hem-o-lok clips was <euro>76.9, and that of the three endoloop ligatures was <euro>88.5. In hem-o-lok group of patients, one intraoperative complication was observed, involving bleeding of mesoappendix. There were no postoperative complications in either group of patients. CONCLUSION: The simplicity of application, shorter time of operation, and lower cost of hem-o-lok clips are advantages of this way of securing of the base of the appendix in relation to the standard endoloop procedure.
BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), the standard technique in securing of the base of the appendix is by endoloop ligatures. However, application of the endoloop demands dexterity and a short training, while hem-o-lok clips may be more advantageous to use due to their simplicity of application and low cost. The objective of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and eventual advantages of this way of securing of the base of the appendix. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective study was conducted in the period from August 2006 to August 2008. The patients were divided into two groups; in the first group the base of the appendix was secured by double endoloop ligatures, while in the second group it was done by double nonabsorbable hem-o-lok clips. The data collected included age, gender, operative time, hospital stay, costs, and intra- and postoperative complications. RESULTS: There was no difference in hospital stay between the two groups of patients; mean operative time was 47.1 ± 6.7 min in the first group where the base was secured by endoloop ligatures, and was 38.7 ± 5.0 min in the group where the base was secured by hem-o-lok clips. The cost of the three hem-o-lok clips was <euro>76.9, and that of the three endoloop ligatures was <euro>88.5. In hem-o-lok group of patients, one intraoperative complication was observed, involving bleeding of mesoappendix. There were no postoperative complications in either group of patients. CONCLUSION: The simplicity of application, shorter time of operation, and lower cost of hem-o-lok clips are advantages of this way of securing of the base of the appendix in relation to the standard endoloop procedure.
Authors: M Tobias-Machado; Pedro Forseto; Jimmy A Medina; Marcelo Watanabe; Roberto V Juliano; Eric R Wroclawski Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.541
Authors: Kerstin S Schick; Thomas P Hüttl; Jan M Fertmann; Hans-Martin Hornung; Karl-Walter Jauch; Johannes N Hoffmann Journal: World J Surg Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Sashi S Kommu; Joanne Cooke; Stephen Gordon; Christian Brown; Ben Eddy; Peter D Rimington; Abhay Rane Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-11-19 Impact factor: 5.588
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
Authors: Alexandre C Bomfim; Cassio Andreoni; Ari Miotto; Mardhen B Araújo; Valdemar Ortiz; Luiz F Poli de Figueiredo; Miguel Srougi Journal: Acta Cir Bras Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.388
Authors: Dirk Rolf Bulian; Jürgen Knuth; Axel Sauerwald; Michael Alfred Ströhlein; Rolf Lefering; Jörg Ansorg; Markus Maria Heiss Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: K Kliuchanok; W Keßler; I Partecke; U Walschus; T Schulze; C D Heidecke; M Patrzyk Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2019-08-24 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Gurdeep S Mannu; Maria K Sudul; Joao H Bettencourt-Silva; Elspeth Cumber; Fangfang Li; Allan B Clark; Yoon K Loke Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-11-13
Authors: Lars Ivo Partecke; Wolfram Kessler; Wolfram von Bernstorff; Stephan Diedrich; Claus-Dieter Heidecke; Maciej Patrzyk Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2010-06-26 Impact factor: 3.445