PURPOSE: Ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity due to the improved understanding of patient selection criteria, the application of enhanced recovery pathways, and the potential for improving healthcare resource utilization. The aim of the review was to compare the morbidity and readmission rates between ambulatory and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Studies from 2014 to 2018, on adult patients undergoing ambulatory LA, were considered. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool the total number of complications and readmission events in the ambulatory and conventional groups. RESULTS: A total of 5 studies met our inclusion criteria accounting for 7079 total of patients with acute appendicitis treated by ambulatory LA and 6370 patients treated by conventional LA. We included four observational studies (two prospective and two retrospective) and one randomized controlled trial. Length of stay was significantly lower in the ambulatory group (mean difference = - 15.63 h, 95% CI = - 21.78 to - 9.49, P = < 0.00001). The relative risk (RR) of reoperation was 0.49 (95% CI = 0.12-1.95, P = 0.31). The results demonstrated a pooled RR of overall morbidity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.65-0.97, P = 0.02) and a pooled RR of readmission of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.59-0.88, P = 0.002), both results favoring the ambulatory LA group. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of high-quality comparative studies making conclusive recommendations not possible at this time. Based on current data, ambulatory LA may be safe and feasible as compared with conventional LA.
PURPOSE: Ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity due to the improved understanding of patient selection criteria, the application of enhanced recovery pathways, and the potential for improving healthcare resource utilization. The aim of the review was to compare the morbidity and readmission rates between ambulatory and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Studies from 2014 to 2018, on adult patients undergoing ambulatory LA, were considered. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool the total number of complications and readmission events in the ambulatory and conventional groups. RESULTS: A total of 5 studies met our inclusion criteria accounting for 7079 total of patients with acute appendicitis treated by ambulatory LA and 6370 patients treated by conventional LA. We included four observational studies (two prospective and two retrospective) and one randomized controlled trial. Length of stay was significantly lower in the ambulatory group (mean difference = - 15.63 h, 95% CI = - 21.78 to - 9.49, P = < 0.00001). The relative risk (RR) of reoperation was 0.49 (95% CI = 0.12-1.95, P = 0.31). The results demonstrated a pooled RR of overall morbidity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.65-0.97, P = 0.02) and a pooled RR of readmission of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.59-0.88, P = 0.002), both results favoring the ambulatory LA group. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of high-quality comparative studies making conclusive recommendations not possible at this time. Based on current data, ambulatory LA may be safe and feasible as compared with conventional LA.
Authors: Howard Balshem; Mark Helfand; Holger J Schünemann; Andrew D Oxman; Regina Kunz; Jan Brozek; Gunn E Vist; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Joerg Meerpohl; Susan Norris; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: U O Gustafsson; M J Scott; M Hubner; J Nygren; N Demartines; N Francis; T A Rockall; T M Young-Fadok; A G Hill; M Soop; H D de Boer; R D Urman; G J Chang; A Fichera; H Kessler; F Grass; E E Whang; W J Fawcett; F Carli; D N Lobo; K E Rollins; A Balfour; G Baldini; B Riedel; O Ljungqvist Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Casandra L Cash; Richard C Frazee; Stephen W Abernathy; Edward W Childs; Matthew L Davis; John C Hendricks; Randall W Smith Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-05-19 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Elisabeth M L de Wijkerslooth; Jay M Bakas; Joost van Rosmalen; Anne Loes van den Boom; Bas P L Wijnhoven Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 2.571