Literature DB >> 7840381

A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. Laparoscopic Appendectomy Study Group.

A E Ortega1, J G Hunter, J H Peters, L L Swanstrom, B Schirmer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are clear, the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) are more subtle. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether LA is deserving of more widespread clinical application than it has yet received.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized into three groups. LA with an endoscopic linear stapler (LAS) (U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Connecticut) was performed on 78 patients, LA with catgut ligatures (LAL) on 89, and open appendectomy (OA) on 86. LA was performed with a three-trocar technique. OA was accomplished through a right lower-quadrant transverse incision. Data with normal distributions were analyzed by analysis of variance. Nonparametric data were analyzed with either the Kruskal-Wallis H test or Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: The mean operative times for the procedures were 66 +/- 24 minutes (LAS), 68 +/- 25 minutes (LAL), and 58 +/- 27 minutes (OA). The relative brevity of OA compared to LAS and LAL was statistically significant (P < 0.01). Conversion to open procedures was approximately as frequent in the LAS group (n = 5) and the LAL (n = 6). One OA, 2 LAS, and 11 LAL patients experienced vomiting postoperatively (P < 0.05). Two intra-abdominal abscesses occurred in LAS, 4 in LAL, and 0 in OA patients (P = NS). Wound infections were more common following OA (n = 11) than LAL (n = 4) or LAS (n = 0) (P < 0.05, < 0.001). The mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 2.16 +/- 3.2 days (LAS), 2.98 +/- 2.7 days (LAL), and 2.83 +/- 1.6 (OA) (P < 0.05 OA versus LAS). The number of days patients required pain medications overall was not different between groups, but a subgroup analysis of 134 patients who rated their postoperative pain on a visual analogue scale revealed a significantly lower mean level among patients undergoing LA (LAS and LAL) versus OA (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing LA resumed regular activities sooner than those undergoing OA (9 +/- 9 days versus 14 +/- 11 days, P < 0.001). Rates of readmission to the hospital were similar for all procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy appears to have distinct advantages over open appendectomy. The laparoscopic procedures produced less pain and allowed more rapid return to full activities, and LAS required shorter hospital stays. The only disadvantages to the laparoscopic approach were slightly increased operative time for both procedures, and increased emesis following LAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7840381     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(99)80138-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  94 in total

1.  Intraabdominal abscess following open and laparoscopic appendectomy in the pediatric population.

Authors:  R McKinlay; S Neeleman; R Klein; K Stevens; J Greenfeld; M Ghory; C Cosentino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-03-07       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  SAGES Appropriateness Conference: a summary.

Authors:  R E Glasgow; A Fingerhut; J Hunter
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-09-29       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Residual appendix producing small-bowel obstruction after laparoscopic appendectomy.

Authors:  R Gordon; F Bamehriz; Daniel W Birch
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2006-2008.

Authors:  Hossein Masoomi; Steven Mills; Matthew O Dolich; Noor Ketana; Joseph C Carmichael; Ninh T Nguyen; Michael J Stamos
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  The incidence and risk factors of post-laparotomy adhesive small bowel obstruction.

Authors:  Galinos Barmparas; Bernardino C Branco; Beat Schnüriger; Lydia Lam; Kenji Inaba; Demetrios Demetriades
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Port site necrotising fasciitis following laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Authors:  Gargeshwari K G Raghavendra; Sarah Mills; Michael Carr
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2010-10-12

7.  Cost perspectives of laparoscopic and open appendectomy.

Authors:  D E Moore; T Speroff; E Grogan; B Poulose; M D Holzman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-12-23       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Omer Aziz; Thanos Athanasiou; Paris P Tekkis; Sanjay Purkayastha; James Haddow; Vitali Malinovski; Paraskevas Paraskeva; Ara Darzi
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Securing the appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: evidence for routine stapling?

Authors:  G Kazemier; K H in't Hof; S Saad; H J Bonjer; S Sauerland
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-07-03       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database.

Authors:  Ulrich Guller; Sheleika Hervey; Harriett Purves; Lawrence H Muhlbaier; Eric D Peterson; Steve Eubanks; Ricardo Pietrobon
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.