OBJECTIVE: This report describes the first cohort study comparing pure transvaginal appendectomies (TVAs) to traditional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs). METHODS: Between August 2008 and August 2010, 42 patients were offered a pure TVA. Patients who did not wish to undergo a TVA underwent a LA and served as the control group. Demographic data, operative time, length of stay, patient controlled analgesia (PCA) 12-hour-morphine utilization, complications, return to normal activity, and return to work were recorded. RESULTS: Eighteen of 40 enrolled patients underwent a pure TVA. Two patients refused to participate in this study. Mean age (TVA: 31.3 ± 2.5 years vs. LA: 28.2 ± 2.3 years, P = 0.36), mean body mass index (TVA: 23.7 ± 1.2 kg/m2 vs. LA: 23.6 ± 0.7 kg/m2, P = 0.96) mean operative time (TVA: 44.4 ± 4.5 minutes vs. LA: 39.8 ± 2.6 minutes, P = 0.38), and mean length of hospital stay (TVA: 1.1 ± 0.1 days vs. LA: 1.2 ± 0.1 days, P = 0.53) were not statistically significant. However, mean postoperative morphine-use (TVA: 8.7 ± 2.0 mg vs. LA: 23.0 ± 3.4 mg, P < 0.01), return to normal activity (TVA: 3.3 ± 0.4 days vs. LA: 9.7 ± 1.6 days, P < 0.01), and return to work (TVA: 5.4 ± 1.1 days vs. LA: 10.7 ± 1.5 days, P = 0.01) were statistically significant. One conversion in the TVA group to a LA was necessary because of inability to maintain adequate pneumoperitoneum. Four complications were observed: 1 intraabdominal abscess and 1 case of urinary retention in the TVA group; 1 early postoperative bowel obstruction and 1 case of urinary retention in the LA group. CONCLUSIONS: Pure TVA is a safe and well-tolerated procedure with significantly less pain and faster recovery compared to traditional LA.
OBJECTIVE: This report describes the first cohort study comparing pure transvaginal appendectomies (TVAs) to traditional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs). METHODS: Between August 2008 and August 2010, 42 patients were offered a pure TVA. Patients who did not wish to undergo a TVA underwent a LA and served as the control group. Demographic data, operative time, length of stay, patient controlled analgesia (PCA) 12-hour-morphine utilization, complications, return to normal activity, and return to work were recorded. RESULTS: Eighteen of 40 enrolled patients underwent a pure TVA. Two patients refused to participate in this study. Mean age (TVA: 31.3 ± 2.5 years vs. LA: 28.2 ± 2.3 years, P = 0.36), mean body mass index (TVA: 23.7 ± 1.2 kg/m2 vs. LA: 23.6 ± 0.7 kg/m2, P = 0.96) mean operative time (TVA: 44.4 ± 4.5 minutes vs. LA: 39.8 ± 2.6 minutes, P = 0.38), and mean length of hospital stay (TVA: 1.1 ± 0.1 days vs. LA: 1.2 ± 0.1 days, P = 0.53) were not statistically significant. However, mean postoperative morphine-use (TVA: 8.7 ± 2.0 mg vs. LA: 23.0 ± 3.4 mg, P < 0.01), return to normal activity (TVA: 3.3 ± 0.4 days vs. LA: 9.7 ± 1.6 days, P < 0.01), and return to work (TVA: 5.4 ± 1.1 days vs. LA: 10.7 ± 1.5 days, P = 0.01) were statistically significant. One conversion in the TVA group to a LA was necessary because of inability to maintain adequate pneumoperitoneum. Four complications were observed: 1 intraabdominal abscess and 1 case of urinary retention in the TVA group; 1 early postoperative bowel obstruction and 1 case of urinary retention in the LA group. CONCLUSIONS: Pure TVA is a safe and well-tolerated procedure with significantly less pain and faster recovery compared to traditional LA.
Authors: Philip C Müller; Jonas D Senft; Philip Gath; Daniel C Steinemann; Felix Nickel; Adrian T Billeter; Beat P Müller-Stich; Georg R Linke Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: K H Fuchs; A Meining; D von Renteln; G Fernandez-Esparrach; W Breithaupt; C Zornig; A Lacy Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-03-30 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: K S Lehmann; C Zornig; G Arlt; M Butters; D R Bulian; R Manger; J Burghardt; N Runkel; A Pürschel; J Köninger; H J Buhr Journal: Chirurg Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: Daniel Solomon; Amir H Shariff; Dan-Arin Silasi; Andrew J Duffy; Robert L Bell; Kurt E Roberts Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-05-02 Impact factor: 4.584