Literature DB >> 27752812

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

James K Hamill1,2, Jamie-Lee Rahiri3, Gamage Gunaratna4, Andrew G Hill5,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: No enhanced recovery after surgery protocol has been published for laparoscopic appendectomy. This was a review of evidence-based interventions that could optimize recovery after appendectomy.
METHODS: Interventions for the review Clinical pathway, fast-track or enhanced recovery protocols; needlescopic approach; single incision laparoscopic (SIL) approach; natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES); regional nerve blocks; intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA); drains. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science Core Collection. Study eligibility criteria Randomized controlled trial (RCT); prospective evaluation with historical controls for studies assessing clinical pathways/protocols. Participants People undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Meta-analysis, random effects model.
RESULTS: Clinical pathways for laparoscopic appendectomy were safe in selected patients, but may be associated with a higher readmission rate. Needlescopic surgery offered no recovery advantage over traditional laparoscopic appendectomy. SIL afforded no recovery advantage over conventional laparoscopic surgery, but may increase operative time in children. The search found no RCT on NOTES appendectomy. Transversus abdominis plane blocks did not significantly reduce pain after laparoscopic appendectomy. IPLA should be considered in laparoscopic appendectomy; studies in paediatric surgery are needed. The search found no RCT on the use of drains in appendectomy.
CONCLUSIONS: This review identified gaps in the literature on optimizing recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy and found the need for more randomized controlled trials on regional anaesthesia and intraperitoneal local anaesthesia in children.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analgesia; Appendectomy; Laparoscopy; Length of stay; Postoperative pain

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27752812     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5274-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  58 in total

1.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a single centre experience.

Authors:  Siwo Ernest Amos; Wu Shuo-Dong; Ying Fan; Yu Tian; Chun-Chih Chen
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 3.  Intraperitoneal use of local anesthetic in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Arman Kahokehr; Tarik Sammour; Mattias Soop; Andrew G Hill
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 7.027

Review 4.  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

5.  The sustained impact of an evidenced-based clinical pathway for acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Brad W Warner; Kate A Rich; Harry Atherton; Charlotte L Andersen; Uma R Kotagal
Journal:  Semin Pediatr Surg       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn E Vist; Regina Kunz; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-04-26

7.  Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery appendectomy.

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

8.  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

9.  Rectus sheath block for laparoscopic appendicectomy: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  James K Hamill; Andrew Liley; Andrew G Hill
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2015-01-12       Impact factor: 1.872

Review 10.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-incision versus conventional multiport appendicectomy.

Authors:  S R Markar; A Karthikesalingam; F Di Franco; A M Harris
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  3 in total

1.  Ambulatory versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mario Trejo-Avila; Eduardo Cárdenas-Lailson; Carlos Valenzuela-Salazar; Jose Herrera-Esquivel; Mucio Moreno-Portillo
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Modified enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in patients with acute cholecystitis: efficacy, safety and feasibility. Multicenter randomized control study.

Authors:  Taras Nechay; Svetlana Titkova; Alexander Tyagunov; Mikhail Anurov; Alexander Sazhin
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-03-22

3.  Retrospective review of laparoscopic versus open surgery in the treatment of appendiceal abscess in pediatric patients: Laparoscopic versus open surgery for appendiceal abscess.

Authors:  Ping Li; Yan Han; Yang Yang; Hongjie Guo; Fabao Hao; Yan Tang; Chunbao Guo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.889

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.