Postoperative intestinal obstruction caused by staple-related internal hernia after laparoscopic appendectomy: a case report

Patient: Male, 51-year-oldFinal Diagnosis: Congenial dual internal hernia with small bowel obstructionSymptoms: Abdominal pain • vomiting • constipationMedication: —Clinical Procedure: —Specialty: SurgeryObjective:Rare diseaseBackground:Internal hernias involve protrusion of the small bowel through a peritoneal or mesenteric space in the abdominal or pelvic cavity. Congenital internal small bowel hernias are rare and patients with them usually present with small bowel obstruction (SBO) at a young age, whereas in older patients, internal small bowel hernias usually are acquired secondary to previous surgery. The present report is of a rare case of SBO due to dual congenital internal small bowel hernias in a 51-year-old man with no history of abdominal surgery.Case Report:We report a case of dual congenital internal hernias of the small bowel in a patient who presented with symptoms and signs of SBO. He had no history of abdominal trauma, surgery, or comorbid conditions. His abdomen was mildly distended with minimal tenderness in the upper left quadrant but there was no guarding or rebound tenderness. Abdominal X-rays confirmed the SBO. A contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan of the patient’s abdomen revealed SBO with transition at 2 points, suggestive of a closed-loop obstruction. However, the exact cause of the SBO was confirmed at laparotomy, which revealed dual internal hernias (intramesosigmoid and paraduodenal). The hernias were managed individually and the patient had a successful outcome after surgery.Conclusions:Although the present report is of a rare presentation of internal small bowel hernia, the case underscores that patients with this condition may present with SBO. Successful surgical management requires knowledge of the intra-abdominal peritoneal spaces and management of the hernia sac.

Staple line as a cause of unusual early internal hernia after appendectomy

Association between appendiceal stump closure method and post-operative bowel obstruction after laparoscopic appendectomy

Risk for Bowel Obstruction Following Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy

A Case of Small Bowel Obstruction Following Appendectomy

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in children with uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis

Objective: Despite many randomized controlled trials, it is still not clear whether open appendectomy or laparoscopic appendectomy is the most appropriate surgical approach to acute Appendicitis. It is also widely recognized that laparoscopic removal of appendectomy is a well-established procedure with good outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term results of open appendectomy versus laparoscopic appendectomy in adults. Methods: We undertook a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing open appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy in adults. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to June 20, 2017. Calculations were made of the effect sizes of short-term outcomes: wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative complications, peritonitis, postoperative ileus, urinary tract infection, and reoperation, the effect sizes were then pooled by a fixed or random-effects model. Results: Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials with 4311 participants were included. Meta-analysis of the available literature demonstrated that laparoscopic appendectomy in adults was associated with lower incidence of wound infection (OR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.42-0.70, P<0.00001), and fewer postoperative complications (OR=0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.90, P= 0.001). Further analysis did not reveal significant differences between the two surgery approaches in intra-abdominal abscess, peritonitis, postoperative ileus, urinary tract infection, and reoperation in adults. Conclusion: Laparoscopic appendectomy reduces wound infections and postoperative complications in the treatment of adult acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is worth recommending as an effective and safe procedure for acute appendicitis in adults.

BackgroundAlthough laparoscopic surgery has been available for a long time and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been performed universally, it is still not clear whether open appendectomy (OA) or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the most appropriate surgical approach to acute appendicitis. The purpose of this work is to compare the therapeutic effects and safety of laparoscopic and conventional "open" appendectomy by means of a meta-analysis.MethodsA meta-analysis was performed of all randomized controlled trials published in English that compared LA and OA in adults and children between 1990 and 2009. Calculations were made of the effect sizes of: operating time, postoperative length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, resumption of diet, complications rates, and conversion to open surgery. The effect sizes were then pooled by a fixed or random-effects model.ResultsForty-four randomized controlled trials with 5292 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Operating time was 12.35 min longer for LA (95% CI: 7.99 to 16.72, p < 0.00001). Hospital stay after LA was 0.60 days shorter (95% CI: -0.85 to -0.36, p < 0.00001). Patients returned to their normal activity 4.52 days earlier after LA (95% CI: -5.95 to -3.10, p < 0.00001), and resumed their diet 0.34 days earlier(95% CI: -0.46 to -0.21, p < 0.00001). Pain after LA on the first postoperative day was significantly less (p = 0.008). The overall conversion rate from LA to OA was 9.51%. With regard to the rate of complications, wound infection after LA was definitely reduced (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.59, p < 0.00001), while postoperative ileus was not significantly reduced(OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.47, p = 0.71). However, intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), intraoperative bleeding and urinary tract infection (UIT) after LA, occurred slightly more frequently(OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.43, p = 0.05; OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.54 to 4.48, p = 0.41; OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.58 to 5.29, p = 0.32).ConclusionLA provides considerable benefits over OA, including a shorter length of hospital stay, less postoperative pain, earlier postoperative recovery, and a lower complication rate. Furthermore, over the study period it was obvious that there had been a trend toward fewer differences in operating time for the two procedures. Although LA was associated with a slight increase in the incidence of IAA, intraoperative bleeding and UIT, it is a safe procedure. It may be that the widespread use of LA is due to its better therapeutic effect.

RICHARDS W.; WATSON, D.; LYNCH, G.; REED, G. W.; OLSEN, D.; SPAW, A.; HOLCOMB, W.; FREXES-STEED, M.; GOLDSTEIN, R.; SHARP, K.

PurposeAlthough laparoscopic appendectomies (LAs) are performed universally, a controversy still exists whether the LA is an appropriate surgical approach to complicated appendicitis (CA). We retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomies for CA.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 60 consecutive patients who were diagnosed as having CA from July 2009 to January 2011. Outcomes such as operative time, time to soft diet, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were analyzed.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences in operative time between the LA and the open appendectomy (OA) groups. Return to soft diet was faster in the LA group (2.1 ± 1.2 vs. 3.5 ± 1.5 days; P = 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter for the LA group (4.4 ± 2.3 vs. 5.8 ± 2.9 days; P = 0.045). The overall complication rates showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups. In cases involving a periappendiceal abscess, the LA had a significantly higher incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) and postoperative ileus (PI; P = 0.028).ConclusionThe LA showed good results in terms of the time to soft diet, the length of hospital stay, and surgical site infection (SSI) whereas the overall complication rates were similar for the two groups. However, the LA was associated with significantly higher incidence of IAA and PI for the cases with a periappendiceal abscess. Therefore, when using a LA, the surgeon must take great care to minimize the incidence of IAA and PI if a periappendiceal abscess is present.

Acute appendicitis is a common condition in the pediatric population. In patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is preferred as compared to open appendectomy (OA). However, in patients with complicated appendicitis (CA), as defined as suppurative, gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, or appendicitis with periappendicular abscess formation, the decision to perform OA or LA remains unclear. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. An electronic database search from 1997 to 2017 was performed using the Cochrane, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases. Data analysis, including subgroup analysis of randomized-control trials, was performed using RevMan 5.3. Assessment of methodological and statistical heterogeneity, as well as publication bias of the included studies, was performed. Six randomized-control trials (296 LA versus 373 OA) and 33 case-control trials (3106 LA versus 4149 OA) were analyzed. Compared to OA, LA has a shorter length of stay (WMD=- 0.96, 95% CI - 1.47 to - 0.45) and a lower rate of surgical site infection (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.25-0.54), although the rates of intraabdominal abscess formation were similar (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.71-1.43). LA was also shown to have lower readmission rates, lower incidences of postoperative ileus or intestinal obstruction, lower incidence of reoperation, as well as a shorter time taken to oral intake. Operative time for OA was shorter than LA (WMD = 12.44, 95% CI 2.00-22.87). While studies in the past have associated LA with higher rates of intraabdominal abscess in patients with CA, our meta-analysis has shown that they were similar. Considering this, together with other improved postoperative outcomes, LA should be the procedure of choice in pediatric patients presenting with CA.

This metaanalysis aimed to compare endoscopic linear stapling and loop ligatures used to secure the base of the appendix. Randomized controlled trials on appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy were systematically searched and critically appraised. The results in terms of complication rates, operating time, and hospital stay were pooled by standard metaanalytic techniques. Data on 427 patients from four studies were included. The operative time was 9 min longer when loops were used (p = 0.04). Superficial wound infections (odds ratio [OR], 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.71; p = 0.01) and postoperative ileus (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.89; p = 0.03) were significantly less frequent when the appendix stump was secured with staples instead of loops. Of 10 intraoperative ruptures of the appendix, 7 occurred in loop-treated patients (p = 0.46). Hospital stay and frequency of postoperative intraabdominal abscess also were comparable in loop-treated and staple-treated patients. The clinical evidence on stump closure methods in laparoscopic appendectomy favors the routine use of endoscopic staplers.

Internal abdominal hernias in childhood.

Background Laparoscopically adjustable gastric bands (LAGB) have been widely employed as a means of weight loss in bariatric surgery over the past two decades. Although now largely superseded by other bariatric surgical techniques, complications from gastric bands continue to be encountered in surgical practice. We report an unusual case of small bowel obstruction due to an internal hernia caused by gastric band tubing resulting in closed loop small bowel obstruction. This is not commonly encountered and emergency general surgeons need to have a high index of suspicion for this condition as a possible cause for small bowel obstruction. Methods A 40 year old male presented with abdominal pain, vomiting and failure to open bowels or pass flatus for nine days. Twelve years previously (2008) he had had Roux n Y gastric bypass (RYGB), followed by by laparoscopic gastric banding of the RYGB about two years later (2010) also in the private sector. He had a soft but distended abdomen, and empty rectum on rectal examination. CT scan abdomen reported as: Multiple loops of distended small bowel demonstrated. No air seen in rectum, indicative of small bowel obstruction. No pneumoperitoneum. There is dilatation of the mid and distal small bowel seen to an apparent transition point in the mid abdomen where a loop is noted associated with the tubing for the inflation device for the gastric band. This appears to be centred on the cause of obstruction and appears tied around the base of mesentery and may be creating a closed loop obstruction, by having created an internal hernia. This patient had an internal hernia around loop of the gastric band tubing with resultant closed loop small bowel obstruction. The patient underwent diagnostic laparoscopy with ileo-caecal resection and primary anastomosis. He made successful recovery. Deflated gastric band remains in-situ. Results While small bowel obstruction is most commonly due to adhesions in individuals who have had previous laparotomy, it is important to bear in mind other causes such as internal hernias particularly in cases of those with history of previous gastric banding or Roux n Y gastric bypass. Early intervention may be necessary to reduce the likelihood of bowel ischaemia and bowel resection. Laparoscopy is a useful tool in the management of small bowel obstruction. Keywords: gastric band, small bowel obstruction, closed loop, emergency surgery, laparoscopy Conclusions Connection tubing causing small bowel obstruction and colonic erosion as a rare complication after laparoscopic gastric banding: a case report. Liza BK Tan, Jimmy BY So, and Asim Shabbir - J Med Case Reports. 2012; 6: 9. Acute small bowel obstruction due to the connecting tube of a gastric band. Federico Oppliger, M.D. Gonzalo Wiedmaier, M.D. Juan. Published April 07 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2014.03.021 An unusual complication of gastric banding: recurrent small bowel obstruction caused by the connecting tube. M A Zappa, E Lattuada, E Mozzi, M Francese, I Antonini, S Radaelli, G Roviaro. Obes Surg . 2006 Jul;16(7):939-41. doi: 10.1381/096089206777822250 Total small bowel herniation through the space between the connecting tube of gastric band and abdominal wall: A case report of a surgical emergency. Tarek Hashem, Soliman M Soliman, Sherif Wagih 2. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2017;30:66-68. doi: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.11.021. Epub 2016 Nov 17

Introduction: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for complicated appendicitis appears to be controversial due to the difficulty in dissection and clearing off the peritoneal contamination, prolonged operating times, higher incidence of post-operative abdominal abscess, and wound infections. Objectives: The objective of the study was to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy (OA) and evaluate the outcome of LA in children with complicated appendicitis. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 182 patients’ records with complicated appendicitis was done. Data collected included demographics, operative time, resumption of oral intake, and infectious complications such as wound infection and intra-abdominal abscess, need for redo surgery, length of hospitalization, and duration of antibiotic use. Patients were followed up for 6 months in the post-operative period to assess delayed complications. Results: LA was performed in 102 patients and 80 patients underwent an OA. The two groups did not differ significantly in mean age, duration of antibiotic use, resumption of oral intake, and length of the hospital stay. The duration of surgery was significantly longer for LA (p&lt;0.0001). However, the wound infection was significantly more common in the OA group than the laparoscopy group (p=0.0058). None of the patients in the LA group developed delayed complications. A total of four patients in the open group had to undergo surgery for late-onset complications. Conclusion: LA for complicated appendicitis is more advantageous than OA as there is reduced surgical site infection. However, the operative time is prolonged with an increased incidence of immediate post-operative intestinal obstruction. Nevertheless, it avoids the late complications of OA.