Abstract
Background: This study aimed to compare open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in children by analyzing the differences in outcomes between the two techniques. Materials and Methods: This was a single-institution retrospective study. Data were collected from the medical records of all children <15 years of age who underwent an appendectomy from 2006 through 2014. Preoperative parameters, appendicitis severity, surgery time, complications, pain treatment, and postoperative outcome including days of hospital stay were collected. LA was performed with a two- or three-port technique, and a McBurney incision was adopted for OA. Conversions were regarded as OA. Results: A total of 406 appendectomies were performed during the study period, 146 (36%) OA (61 conversions) and 260 (64%) LA. No differences were found between the two groups regarding surgery time, operative and postoperative complications, and postoperative pain treatment. In cases of Phlegmonous appendicitis, LA was associated with a significantly shorter median hospital stay than was OA (1 and 1.8 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Healthy and Phlegmonous appendices were more commonly treated with LA (p < 0.01 for both); gangrenous, perforated, and abscessed appendices were more commonly treated with open surgery (p = 0.02, p < 0.01, and p < 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: The study identified no disadvantages of LA compared with OA. Therefore, LA should be the preferred technique because it is associated (Less)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.