Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy versus double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A 1-year randomized controlled trial.

Abstract

Management of appendicitis has evolved dramatically in the last 120 years, from McBurney's large incision to minimally invasive laparoscopic appendectomy to hardly noticeable incisions with SILS. As a bridge between conventional laparoscopic surgery and SILS, double-incision laparoscopic surgery further minimizes the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery by reducing the number of incisions. This study aimed to establish the efficacy of double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (DILA) as an alternative to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy. A total of 60 patients were divided randomly into two groups: the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) group and the DILA appendectomy group. Demographics, diagnostic history, additional intraoperative findings, and duration of operation were recorded. Postoperative pain after 6 h and 24 h and cosmetic outcome after the surgery were also evaluated. Statistical analysis was done using Fisher's exact test, χ2 test, and Student's t-test. No significant difference was observed in demographic and clinical characteristics in either group (P > 0.05). No significant difference in mean postoperative pain was observed between the two groups at 6 h (P = 0.62) or 24 h (P = 0.484). However, patients in the DILA group were more satisfied with their cosmetic outcomes than those in the CLA group (P = 0.04). The mean operative time was 26.4 min in the CLA group and 27.6 min in the DILA group (P = 0.62). DILA can be performed with operative outcomes that are equivalent to CLA but with superior cosmetic outcomes.