Literature DB >> 23154391

A double-blinded randomized controlled trial of laparoendoscopic single-site access versus conventional 3-port appendectomy.

Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh1, Philip Wai Yan Chiu, Tiffany Cho Lam Wong, Michael Chi Ming Poon, Simon Kin Hung Wong, Heng Tat Leong, Paul Bo San Lai, Enders Kwok Wai Ng.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to perform a multicentered prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing laparoendoscopic single-site access (LESS) versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TPLA).
BACKGROUND: The clinical benefits and disadvantages of LESS appendectomy are uncertain.
METHODS: Between October 2009 and March 2011, consecutive patients admitted with clinical or radiological evidence of appendicitis were randomly assigned to receive either LESS or TPLA. The main outcome measurement was overall pain score. Secondary outcome measurements included operative time, conversion rates, morbidity rates, activity pain scores, activity scores, patient satisfaction, and cosmesis scores.
RESULTS: During the study period, 200 patients were recruited to the study. There were no significant differences in the morbidity rates, operative time, conversion rates, and postoperative recovery. There were also no differences in the overall pain score and pain score at rest. However, patients in the LESS group experienced significantly more pain upon coughing or standing and required more intravenous analgesics (P = 0.001, 0.038, and 0.035, respectively). Wound cosmesis and satisfaction scores on the contrary were better in the LESS group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.052). No differences in the quality-of-life assessments were present at 2 weeks after operation.
CONCLUSIONS: LESS and conventional appendectomy resulted in similar perioperative outcomes. However, LESS appendectomy resulted in worst pain scores upon exertion and required a higher dosage of intravenous analgesics when compared with TPLA. On the contrary, wound cosmesis and satisfaction scores were better in the LESS group. Hence, adoption of the technique for appendectomy will depend on patient preferences and the presence of local expertise.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23154391     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182765fcf

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  37 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing single incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

Authors:  Michael Clerveus; Antonio Morandeira-Rivas; Carlos Moreno-Sanz; Maria Luz Herrero-Bogajo; Joaquin Salvelio Picazo-Yeste; Gloria Tadeo-Ruiz
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Chaorong Xue; Bingqiang Lin; Zhengyuan Huang; Zhi Chen
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-12-26       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Randomized controlled trial of EndoWrist-enabled robotic versus human laparoendoscopic single-site access surgery (LESS) in the porcine model.

Authors:  Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh; Shannon Melissa Chan; Hon Chi Yip; Vivien Wai Yin Wong; Philip Wai Yan Chiu; Enders Kwok Wai Ng
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Comparison of robotic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery systems in a suturing and knot tying task.

Authors:  Dan Eisenberg; Tamas J Vidovszky; James Lau; Bernadette Guiroy; Homero Rivas
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Single-Incision Transumbilical Surgery (SITUS) versus Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized comparative study of performance with novices in a dry laboratory.

Authors:  Martin Schoenthaler; Tuba Avcil; Sabina Sevcenco; Udo Nagele; Thomas E W Hermann; Franklin E Kuehhas; Shahrokh F Shariat; Alexander Frankenschmidt; Ulrich Wetterauer; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-02-23       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy in a small hospital.

Authors:  Byung Hee Kang; Kyung Chul Yoon; Sung Woo Jung; Gyeo Ra Lee; Hyung Soon Lee
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 1.859

Review 7.  Interventions to optimize recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy: a scoping review.

Authors:  James K Hamill; Jamie-Lee Rahiri; Gamage Gunaratna; Andrew G Hill
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Gasless transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy as a safe and cost-effective alternative surgical procedure for mild acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Koji Munakata; Mamoru Uemura; Junzo Shimizu; Masakazu Miyake; Taishi Hata; Kimimasa Ikeda; Keizo Dono; Masashi Kitada; Yuichiro Doki; Masaki Mori
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 2.549

9.  Postoperative pain relief using wound infiltration with 0.5% bupivacaine in single-incision laparoscopic surgery for an appendectomy.

Authors:  So Ra Ahn; Dong Baek Kang; Cheol Lee; Won Cheol Park; Jeong Kyun Lee
Journal:  Ann Coloproctol       Date:  2013-12-31

Review 10.  Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yu-Long Cai; Xian-Ze Xiong; Si-Jia Wu; Yao Cheng; Jiong Lu; Jie Zhang; Yi-Xin Lin; Nan-Sheng Cheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.