Literature DB >> 20056066

Changing management of suspected appendicitis in the laparoscopic era.

Fayyaz Akbar1, Mansoor Yousuf, Richard J Morgan, Andrew Maw.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to examine the trends in performance of open and laparoscopic appendicectomy at a district general hospital, and to compare the diagnostic outcomes in the two patient groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from patients undergoing an open or laparoscopic procedure for suspected appendicitis in an 8-year period between January 2000 and December 2007.
RESULTS: A total of 1700 patients (873 women, 827 men) with a median age of 24 years underwent surgery for suspected appendicitis in the study period. There were 1357 patients (group A) who underwent an open procedure for presumed appendicitis (610 women and 747 men [F:M ratio, 1:1.2]). There were 343 patients (group B) who underwent laparoscopy with or without laparoscopic appendicectomy (82 men and 261 women [F:M ratio, 1:0.31]). Over the study period, there was an increasing trend towards the performance of laparoscopic procedures for suspected appendicitis, increasing from 4% to 39% of the total per year. In group A, 1172 (86%) patients had appendicular pathology, while the appendix was normal histologically in 178 (13%). Other pathologies were diagnosed intra-operatively in 1%. In group B, 193 patients (56%) had appendicular pathology while in 150 (44%) the appendix was normal. In the subgroup with a normal appendix, 56 patients (37%) had another cause for their symptoms identified.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendicectomy is increasingly being performed. Laparoscopy is often used as a diagnostic tool in general surgical patients, particularly women, with lower abdominal pain. In effect, these patients are undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy, with or without appendicectomy. This has resulted in a lower positive appendicectomy rate, but a higher yield of diagnoses other than appendicitis, in the laparoscopic group. Overall appendicectomy rates, however, have remained unchanged.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20056066      PMCID: PMC3024621          DOI: 10.1308/003588410X12518836439920

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  7 in total

1.  Moving from open to laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Authors:  K J Sweeney; F B V Keane
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Are negative appendectomies still acceptable?

Authors:  Kory Jones; Alberto A Peña; Ernest L Dunn; Lennard Nadalo; Alicia J Mangram
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Analysis of 8651 appendicectomies in England and Wales during 1992.

Authors:  R J Baigrie; T C Dehn; S M Fowler; D C Dunn
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  High negative appendectomy rates are no longer acceptable.

Authors:  M Colson; K A Skinner; G Dunnington
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Endoscopic appendectomy.

Authors:  K Semm
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 10.093

6.  Laparoscopy may be lowering the threshold to operate on patients with suspected appendicitis.

Authors:  J M McGreevy; S R G Finlayson; R Alvarado; W S Laycock; C M Birkmeyer; J D Birkmeyer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-03-26       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Appendicitis near its centenary.

Authors:  J Berry; R A Malt
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 12.969

  7 in total
  7 in total

1.  The RIPASA score is sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in a western population.

Authors:  Muhammad Usman Malik; Tara M Connelly; Faisal Awan; Frederik Pretorius; Constantino Fiuza-Castineira; Osama El Faedy; Paul Balfe
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  The Alvarado score versus computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A prospective study.

Authors:  Ashraf F Al-Faouri; Khaled Y Ajarma; Abdulhamid M Al-Abbadi; Abdullah H Al-Omari; Tariq S Almunaizel; Alaa A Alzu'bi; Ra'ed Y Al-Jarrah; Omar Y Abo-Zaiton
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2016-08-11

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Nigel D'Souza; Georgina Hicks; Richard Beable; Antony Higginson; Bo Rud
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-12-14

4.  Management of Appendicitis Globally Based on Income of Countries (MAGIC) Study.

Authors:  Carlos Augusto Gomes; Fikri M Abu-Zidan; Massimo Sartelli; Federico Coccolini; Luca Ansaloni; Gian Luca Baiocchi; Yoram Kluger; Salomone Di Saverio; Fausto Catena
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDECTOMY DOES NOT INCREASE THE RATE OF NEGATIVE APPENDECTOMY along with a lower rate of perforated appendicitis - RESULTS IN 1899 PATIENTS at Zagreb UHC.

Authors:  Goran Augustin; Zrinka Čižmešija; Jurica Žedelj; Igor Petrović; Vanja Ivković; Anko Antabak; Davor Mijatović; Mate Škegro
Journal:  Acta Clin Croat       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 0.932

6.  Negative Appendicectomy Rate: Incidence and Predictors.

Authors:  Khaled Noureldin; Ali Asgar Hatim Ali; Mohamed Issa; Heer Shah; Bolu Ayantunde; Abraham Ayantunde
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-01-22

7.  Appendiceal Crohn's disease: a rare differential of right iliac fossa pain.

Authors:  Adam James Crellin; Omar Musbahi; Natasha Onwu; Sandeep Singh
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2020-02-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.