PURPOSE: Recently, single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been popular in use with its progress studied for more minimally invasive surgery and cosmetic improvement. We investigated the feasibility and efficacy of SILS for appendectomy (SILS-A) in children and compare it with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA). METHODS: We studied, retrospectively, adolescent patients who underwent C-LA or SILS-A. There were 25 patients in the C-LA group and 30 patients in the SILS-A group. The clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The SILS-A procedures were performed successfully in adolescent patients . There were no significant difference between the C-LA and SILS-A group with respect to demographic data and post-operative outcomes. There was one complication (4%) in the C-LA group and two complications (6.6%) in the SILS-A group, but there was no significant difference. CONCLUSION: SILS-A was technically feasible and safe in children. Considering little postoperative scar and no difference in post-operative outcomes compared to C-LA, SILA could be applicable in adolescent patients. Larger studies and further technical implements will be necessary to assess the true benefit of this approach.
PURPOSE: Recently, single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been popular in use with its progress studied for more minimally invasive surgery and cosmetic improvement. We investigated the feasibility and efficacy of SILS for appendectomy (SILS-A) in children and compare it with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA). METHODS: We studied, retrospectively, adolescent patients who underwent C-LA or SILS-A. There were 25 patients in the C-LA group and 30 patients in the SILS-A group. The clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The SILS-A procedures were performed successfully in adolescent patients . There were no significant difference between the C-LA and SILS-A group with respect to demographic data and post-operative outcomes. There was one complication (4%) in the C-LA group and two complications (6.6%) in the SILS-A group, but there was no significant difference. CONCLUSION: SILS-A was technically feasible and safe in children. Considering little postoperative scar and no difference in post-operative outcomes compared to C-LA, SILA could be applicable in adolescent patients. Larger studies and further technical implements will be necessary to assess the true benefit of this approach.
Authors: Sarah C Oltmann; Homero Rivas; Esteban Varela; Mouza T Goova; Daniel J Scott Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2009-03-20 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Oscar Vidal; Mauro Valentini; Cesar Ginestà; Josep Martí; Juan J Espert; Guerson Benarroch; Juan C García-Valdecasas Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-08-19 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Tae Ho Hong; Hyung Lan Kim; Yoon Suk Lee; Jin Jo Kim; Keun Ho Lee; Young Kyoung You; Se Jeong Oh; Seung Man Park Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Santiago Horgan; John P Cullen; Mark A Talamini; Yoav Mintz; Alberto Ferreres; Garth R Jacobsen; Bryan Sandler; Julie Bosia; Thomas Savides; David W Easter; Michelle K Savu; Sonia L Ramamoorthy; Emily Whitcomb; Sanjay Agarwal; Emily Lukacz; Guillermo Dominguez; Pedro Ferraina Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-04-03 Impact factor: 4.584