Scott A Turner1, Hee Soo Jung2, John E Scarborough2. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI. Electronic address: Sturner6@kumc.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine whether utilization of a retrieval bag during laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis (perforation/abscess) is associated with postoperative surgical site infection rates. METHODS: We studied patients presented in the database of the 2016 Appendectomy-Targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for pathology-confirmed appendicitis. The primary predictor variable was intraoperative utilization of a specimen retrieval bag for removal of the appendix from the peritoneal cavity. The primary outcome variable was 30-day postoperative surgical site infection. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between use of a specimen retrieval bag and postoperative surgical site infection rate after adjustment for patient- and disease-related variables. RESULTS: A total of 10,357 patients were included for analysis. Of these procedures, 9,585 (92.6%) included the use of a specimen bag and 772 (7.5%) did not. The 30-day incidence of postoperative surgical site infection was 4.2% in the group in which no bag was used and 3.6% in the group in which a bag was used (adjusted odds ratio of surgical site infection with no bag utilization was 1.15 [95% confidence interval 0.78-1.69; P = .49]). The lack of a statistically significant association between bag utilization and postoperative surgical site infection incidence was also demonstrated for a subgroup of patients with perforated appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Utilization of a retrieval bag during laparoscopic appendectomy is not associated with a statistically significant decrease in postoperative surgical site infection for either uncomplicated or complicated acute appendicitis.
BACKGROUND: To determine whether utilization of a retrieval bag during laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis (perforation/abscess) is associated with postoperative surgical site infection rates. METHODS: We studied patients presented in the database of the 2016 Appendectomy-Targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for pathology-confirmed appendicitis. The primary predictor variable was intraoperative utilization of a specimen retrieval bag for removal of the appendix from the peritoneal cavity. The primary outcome variable was 30-day postoperative surgical site infection. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between use of a specimen retrieval bag and postoperative surgical site infection rate after adjustment for patient- and disease-related variables. RESULTS: A total of 10,357 patients were included for analysis. Of these procedures, 9,585 (92.6%) included the use of a specimen bag and 772 (7.5%) did not. The 30-day incidence of postoperative surgical site infection was 4.2% in the group in which no bag was used and 3.6% in the group in which a bag was used (adjusted odds ratio of surgical site infection with no bag utilization was 1.15 [95% confidence interval 0.78-1.69; P = .49]). The lack of a statistically significant association between bag utilization and postoperative surgical site infection incidence was also demonstrated for a subgroup of patients with perforated appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Utilization of a retrieval bag during laparoscopic appendectomy is not associated with a statistically significant decrease in postoperative surgical site infection for either uncomplicated or complicated acute appendicitis.
Authors: Kovi E Bessoff; Jeff Choi; Christopher J Wolff; Aditi Kashikar; Garrison M Carlos; Luke Caddell; Rida I Khan; Christopher D Stave; David A Spain; Joseph D Forrester Journal: Surg Open Sci Date: 2021-08-26
Authors: Balazs Aczel; Barnabas Szaszi; Gustav Nilsonne; Olmo R van den Akker; Casper J Albers; Marcel Alm van Assen; Jojanneke A Bastiaansen; Daniel Benjamin; Udo Boehm; Rotem Botvinik-Nezer; Laura F Bringmann; Niko A Busch; Emmanuel Caruyer; Andrea M Cataldo; Nelson Cowan; Andrew Delios; Noah Nn van Dongen; Chris Donkin; Johnny B van Doorn; Anna Dreber; Gilles Dutilh; Gary F Egan; Morton Ann Gernsbacher; Rink Hoekstra; Sabine Hoffmann; Felix Holzmeister; Juergen Huber; Magnus Johannesson; Kai J Jonas; Alexander T Kindel; Michael Kirchler; Yoram K Kunkels; D Stephen Lindsay; Jean-Francois Mangin; Dora Matzke; Marcus R Munafò; Ben R Newell; Brian A Nosek; Russell A Poldrack; Don van Ravenzwaaij; Jörg Rieskamp; Matthew J Salganik; Alexandra Sarafoglou; Tom Schonberg; Martin Schweinsberg; David Shanks; Raphael Silberzahn; Daniel J Simons; Barbara A Spellman; Samuel St-Jean; Jeffrey J Starns; Eric Luis Uhlmann; Jelte Wicherts; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers Journal: Elife Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 8.140