Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy Research Articles

Factors prolonging the operative time for transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy in pediatric patients: a retrospective single-center study.

Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (TULAA) is one of the first endoscopic surgeries performed by trainee pediatric surgeons. While the operative time is generally shorter than for conventional laparoscopic appendectomy, the indications for this procedure are unclear and many unknown factors can prolong the operative time. We conducted this study to identify the factors that may prolong the operative time for TULAA. This retrospective, single-center study was conducted between 2015 and 2023. We performed multivariate analysis to identify the factors associated with prolonged operative time by analyzing TULAA procedures performed by trainees. The study included 243 patients. The median operative time was 84min (interquartile range, 69-114min). Multivariate analysis revealed that an increased body mass index, elevated C-reactive protein level, a history of conservative treatment for acute appendicitis, and appendix perforation, for the patient; < 6years' experience since graduation for the operating surgeon; and lack of board certification as a supervisor from the Japanese Society of Pediatric Surgeons for the attending surgeon were independent risk factors for prolonging the operative time. Having an attending surgeon with board certification as a supervisor by the Japanese Society of Pediatric Surgeons contributes to reducing the operative time required for TULAA.

THE STUDY OF COMPARISON OF SINGLE-INCISION LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS CONVENTIONAL LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDECTOMY: A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Background: Acute appendicitis is highly prevalent in children with an acute abdomen, and appendectomy is still the main method of treatment for this disease. The standard treatments for acute appendicitis are early open surgery and laparoscopic surgery. The aim: The aim of this study to show about comparison of single incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. Methods: By the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020, this study was able to show that it met all of the requirements. This search approach, publications that came out between 2014 and 2024 were taken into account. Several different online reference sources, like Pubmed, SagePub, and Sciencedirect were used to do this. It was decided not to take into account review pieces, works that had already been published, or works that were only half done. Result: Eight publications were found to be directly related to our ongoing systematic examination after a rigorous three-level screening approach. Subsequently, a comprehensive analysis of the complete text was conducted, and additional scrutiny was given to these articles. Conclusion: HLA has a negative impact on quality of life and aesthetics because it requires three surgical incisions. On the contrary, in single-incision transumbilical laparoscopic appendicectomy (SILA), the incision is made around the umbilicus.

Comparison of Transumbilical Laparoscopy-Assisted Appendectomy with Conventional Three-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Performed by Pediatric Surgeons in Training for Appendicitis in Children.

Background: Transumbilical laparoscopy-assisted appendectomy (TULAA) is the technique of choice for all types of appendicitis. However, the technique is challenging for trainees to learn in comparison with performing conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTPLA) in children. We aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of children with appendicitis treated by TULAA versus CTPLA performed by pediatric surgeons in training (PSITs). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric patients with acute appendicitis treated with CTPLA or TULAA between April 2016 and December 2022. Operative time (OT: minutes), pneumoperitoneum time (PT: minutes), blood loss (milliliter), length of hospital stay (days), and surgical site infection rate were compared between the two groups. Operative outcomes were also analyzed according to type of appendicitis such as uncomplicated and complicated cases. Results: Two hundred twenty-five laparoscopic appendectomies were performed by CTPLA (n = 94) or TULAA (n = 131). All cases were performed by PSITs and there was no open conversion cases. TULAA had a shorter OT (67.0 ± 28.4 versus 78.3 ± 21.7; P < .01) and PT (26.1 ± 17.4 versus 52.5 ± 22.1 min; P < .01). The surgical site infection rate was slightly higher in the TULAA group, but the difference was not statistically significant. In uncomplicated appendicitis (n = 164), significant differences between the CTPLA and TULAA groups were observed in OT (CTPLA versus TULAA: 70.7 ± 14.9 versus 59.1 ± 21.6, P < .01) and PT (CTPLA versus TULAA: 43.6 ± 13.1 versus 20.4 ± 13.6, P < .01). With regard to postoperative complications, only surgical site infection was significantly different between the CTPLA and TULAA groups (CTPLA: 0.0% versus TULAA: 8.2%, P < .05). In complicated cases (n = 61), there were significant differences between the groups in PT (CTPLA versus TULAA: 73.4 ± 24.9 versus 42.3 ± 17.2, P < .01) and length of hospital stay (CTPLA versus TULAA: 7.0 ± 1.3 versus 8.9 ± 4.7, P < .05). Conclusions: TULAA had a shorter OT and PT than CTPLA. TULAA for PSITs shows similar safety and feasibility to CTPLA for not only uncomplicated cases but also complicated cases.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using new surgical procedure versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

The aim of this study was to compare the clinic outcomes between new single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (NSLA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA) for patients with acute appendicitis. Patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis and underwent appendectomy were retrospectively collected from a single clinical center from September 2021 to June 2023. Baseline characteristics, surgical information, and postoperative information were compared between the NSLA group and the CTLA group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to find out the predictors of overall complications. A total of 296 patients were enrolled from a single clinical medical center. There were 146 (49.3%) males and 150 (50.7%) females. There were 54 (18.2%) patients in the NSLA group and 242 (81.8%) patients in the CTLA group. After data analysis, we found the patients in the NSLA group had a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) than the CTLA group. The other outcomes including intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.167), operation time (P = 0.282), nature of the appendix (P = 0.971), and overall complications (P = 0.543) were not statistically different. After univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found that age (P = 0.018, OR = 1.039, 95% CI = 1.007-1.072), neutrophil percentage (P = 0.018, OR = 1.070, 95% CI = 1.011-1.132), and fever (P = 0.019, OR = 6.112, 95% CI = 1.340-27.886) were the predictors of overall complications. However, the surgical procedure (NSLA versus CTLA) was not a predictor of overall complications (P = 0.376, OR = 1.964, 95% CI = 0.440-8.768). Compared with CTLA, there was no significant increase in postoperative overall complications with NSLA, making it a safe and feasible new surgical procedure. More studies are needed to evaluate the long-term results.

Needlescopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in young patients.

Several studies have reported that needlescopic appendectomy (NA) is a safe and effective procedure for appendicitis because of reduced trocar wounds and tissue trauma. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of NA in young patients under 40 years of age whose cosmesis matters with appendicitis by comparing it to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). We retrospectively reviewed our database looking for patients under 40 years of age diagnosed with appendicitis who underwent NA or CLA from January 2013 to April 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: the NA group, and the CLA group. Data collected from each group included age, gender, body mass index, preoperative C-reactive protein, emergency or non-emergency settings, operative time, postoperative length of stay, postoperative complications, and pathological diagnosis. Fifty-four patients underwent NA and 53 patients underwent CLA. The groups were similar in terms of demographic features. Pathological diagnoses were divided into the following categories: catarrhalis (n=35), phlegmonous (n=37), and gangrenous (n=35). No significant difference was noted regarding the distribution of the three groups (P=.4). NA resulted in significantly shorter operative times (P=.0005), and reduced lengths of hospital stay (P=.03) as compared to CLA. There was no significant difference in the number of complications between the two groups. NA might be an effective surgical technique when performing a laparoscopic appendectomy in young patients with appendicitis.

＜Editors' Choice＞ Advantages of gasless single-port transumbilical extracorporeal laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children in China: a multi-institutional retrospective study.

Gasless transumbilical extracorporeal laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy is an approach used increasingly to treat uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UAA). However, there is limited information on its clinical effects and value in the Chinese pediatric population. This study retrospectively reviewed patients with UAA treated in two pediatric institutions from January 2018 through October 2021. Enrolled patients were divided into two groups by operative technique: gasless transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (gasless-TULAA, n=142) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA, three-port, n=126). The perioperative clinical data, including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), operation time, time to postoperative ambulation, time to first postoperative exhaust, hospitalization expenses, and postoperative complications (incision infection, intestinal obstruction, and residual abdominal abscess), were compared between the two groups. Operations in both groups were successfully conducted without converting to open surgery. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in age and BMI in the two groups. Compared with CLA, gasless-TULAA showed significantly shorter operation time, earlier postoperative ambulation, shorter postoperative exhaust time, and lower hospital cost (p < 0.001). All patients were followed for 3 months, and postoperative complications were observed in three patients: two patients in the gasless-TULAA group (one with surgical wound effusion, one with intra-abdominal abscess), and one patient in the CLA group (surgical wound infection); there was no significant difference between the groups. Notably, 38 patients initially treated by gasless-TULAA were converted because of intraoperative factors. The gasless-TULAA technique had potential benefits: shortened operation time, better outcome, and greater cost-efficiency. These superiorities are worthy of future large-scale prospective study.

Single-incision compared with conventional laparoscopy for appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A meta-analysis of the relevant literature evaluated the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) relative to those of conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). The major biomedical databases, including ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched up to January 2022 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). SILA and CLA were compared regarding patient body mass index, operative time, and perioperative complications. The Cochrane Handbook and RevMan 5.3 were used to judge trial quality and perform the meta-analysis, respectively. The 17 included RCTs comprised 2068 patients, of whom 1039 and 1029 patients underwent SILA and CLA, respectively. The operative time for SILA was longer than that for CLA (MD = 8.35min, 95% CI = 6.58 to 10.11, P < 0.00001), but the cosmetic results from SILA were superior (SMD = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.58 to 1.03, P < 0.00001). However, the incidence rates were similar in terms of patient body mass index; postoperative pain scores; and rates of abdominal abscess, conversion to open surgery, ileus, surgical site infection, and overall perioperative complications between the two groups. SILA is a safe technique for acute appendicitis, and its cosmetic outcomes are superior to those of CLA.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using a needle-type grasping forceps compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a single-center retrospective study.

ObjectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes between single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using a needle-type grasping forceps (SLAN) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis.MethodsWe retrospectively collected clinical data of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis who underwent SLAN or CLA from May 2019 to May 2021 in our center. The patients’ baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up data were compared between the two groups. Additionally, baseline characteristics were compared with postoperative outcomes in the SLAN group.ResultsNinety-six patients were enrolled (SLAN group, n = 32; CLA group, n = 64). The SLAN group had a shorter hospital stay, lower 24-hour postoperative visual analogue scale scores, shorter postoperative fasting time, lower frequency of antibiotic administration, and longer operative time than the CLA group. In the SLAN group, younger patients had a longer appendix and male patients had a thicker appendix; additionally, patients with an appendiceal diameter of 0.6 to 1.0 cm had a longer postoperative hospital stay and higher frequency of antibiotic administration.ConclusionsCompared with CLA, SLAN may be less invasive, provide faster postoperative recovery, and result in better cosmesis for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. Further research should be performed to evaluate the long-term outcomes.

Surgical Site Infection Following Single-Port Appendectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis.

IntroductionSurgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the most common postoperative complications after appendectomy leading to recurrent surgery, prolonged hospital stay, and the use of antibiotics. Numerous studies and meta-analyses have been published on the effect of open versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) reporting faster postoperative recovery and less postoperative pain for CLA. A development from CLA has been the single-port appendectomy (SPA), associated with a better cosmesis but seemingly having a higher risk of wound infections. The aim of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis is to investigate whether reduced port or SPA alters the ratio of SSIs.MethodsPubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were screened for suitable articles. All articles published between January 1, 2002, and March 23, 2022, were included. Articles regarding children below the age of 18 were excluded as well as manuscripts that investigated solemnly open appendectomies. Articles were screened for inclusion criteria by two independent authors. Incidence of SSI was the primary outcome. Duration of operation and length of hospital stay were defined as secondary outcomes.ResultsA total of 25 studies were found through a database search describing 5484 patients. A total of 2749 patients received SPA and 2735 received CLA. There was no statistical difference in the rate of SSI (P = 0.98). A total of 22 studies including 4699 patients reported the duration of operation (2223 SPA and 2476 CLA). There was a significantly shorter operation time seen in CLA. The length of hospital stay was reported in 23 studies (4735 patients: 2235 SPA and 2500 CLA). A shorter hospital stay was seen in the SPA group (P < 0.00001). Separately performed analysis of randomized controlled trials could not confirm this effect (P = 0.29).DiscussionSPA is an equally safe procedure considering SSI compared to CLA and does not lead to an increased risk of SSI. A longer operation time for SPA and a minor difference in the length of stay does lead to the use of SPA in selected patients only.

Intra-/Extracorporeal Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: There are two approaches to single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA): intracorporeal (Intra) and extracorporeal (Extra). However, the differences in the efficacy between these procedures remain unclear. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and usefulness of these techniques with those of conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in children. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, CENTRAL, and Scopus databases. Studies comparing outcomes of "Intra-SILA and CLA" or "Extra-SILA and CLA" in children aged <18 years were included. Operative time, hospitalization duration, wound infection, intra-abdominal infection, conversion to open, additional ports, and narcotic doses were evaluated. Results: Overall, 20 studies (six randomized controlled trials [RCTs], one prospective non-RCT, and 13 retrospective cohort studies) (Intra-SILA: 322, CLA: 791 cases; Extra-SILA: 1318, CLA: 1313 cases) were included. Compared with CLA, Extra-SILA was associated with a shorter operative time (mean difference, -9.79 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], -18.34 to -1.24) and lower incidence of intra-abdominal infection (3.3% versus 4.6%, odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82) and a higher rate of additional port (13.6% versus 0%, OR, 43.93; 95% CI, 14.79 to 130.50). Meanwhile, the outcomes of Intra-SILA were comparable with those of CLA. However, the participants in the Intra-SILA group received significantly lower doses of narcotics than those in the CLA group. Conclusion: Although the evidence was insufficient, both Intra- and Extra-SILA were comparable to CLA with respect to safety. Extra-SILA seems to have an advantage of a shorter operative time, but additional ports may be required.

Does the morphology of the umbilicus influence the incidence of surgical site infections in transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy?

Transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA) may be a feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. However, a transumbilical incision may increase incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) compared to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the morphology of the umbilicus and the incidence of SSIs in patients who underwent TULA. This retrospective study analysed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for acute appendicitis at our institution from June 2016 to October 2020. The patients were assigned to the SSI group (those with an SSI) or the non-SSI group. The morphology of the umbilicus was calculated by measuring its width and depth on preoperative computed tomography images and was compared between the SSI and non-SSI groups. The SSI group included 23 patients, while the non-SSI group included 252 patients. The width of the umbilicus was significantly shorter in the SSI group than in the non-SSI group (29 ± 10 mm vs. 34 ± 9 mm, P = 0.027). The umbilicus was slightly deeper in the SSI group than in the non-SSI group; however, the difference was not significant (16 mm vs. 15 mm, P = 0.384). This was the first study investigating the correlation between the morphology of the umbilicus and SSI development in TULA. SSIs tended to occur more commonly in a narrow and deep umbilicus. An extension of the umbilical incision may help prevent SSI in patients with this umbilical morphology.

Comparison of the surgical and post-operative outcomes between single incision laparoscopic appendicectomy (cross triangulation method) with normal conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy

Background: The usual multiport conventional laparoscopic surgeries (appendicectomy) are now being replaced by single incision laparoscopic surgeries (appendicectomy).In our study various aspects of SILS in comparison with the multiport conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy such as incision site pain, duration of surgery, morbidity and instruments used are discussed, duration of surgery, morbidity and instruments used are discussed.Methods: A single blinded randomized control trial was done on patients presenting with acute appendicitis. Pain numerical scale, use of analgesics, time to return to routine activities, hospital re-admission, complication like port site infection, hernia, intra operative complications rates, conversion rates and duration of surgery were evaluated. Various statistics of pain and other parameters are studied and evaluated. The mean operation time, mean recovery time, post-operative pain were statistically analysed using unpaired t-test. Results: Mean operating time was 44.16 minutes for SILS and 26.88 minutes for laparoscopic appendicectomy. The mean operative pain in scale of 1 to 4 was 1.40 and 0.40 for SILS and for laparoscopic appendicenctomy respectively making SILS more pain free and comfortable for the patient. The mean post-operative recovery time was 3.12 days for SILS and 7.88 days for laparoscopic appendicenctomy giving SILS patients more rapid recovery and resumption of work. Conclusions: SILS offers better cosmetic outcome, lesser post-operative pain and shorter duration of hospital stay compared to classical 3 port conventional laparoscopic surgery but at the expense of time. Operative difficulties along with time constraint need to be overcome by the surgeon.

Single site versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: some pain for no gain?

The optimal laparoscopic appendectomy approach is not clear, comparing single site laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) to conventional 3-port appendectomy (CLA). We investigated outcomes in pediatric patients comparing SILA to CLA: length of operation, length of stay, time to resumption of regular diet, follow up, rehospitalization, and cost. Data was collected from children 1 to 18 years with appendectomy at Loma Linda University from 2018 to 2020, operated by two surgeons. Analysis utilized two-sample T, chi-squared, and Fisher's exact tests. Of 173 patients, 77 underwent SILA and 96 had CLA. There was no gender, age, or race difference between groups. Mean WBC was 17.5×103/mL in SILA group, compared to 15.3×103/mL in CLA group (P=0.004). Operative time was 47.0 SILA compared to 49.5 minutes CLA (P=0.269). Of SILA cases, 55.8% were simple appendicitis, while 53.3% of the CLA cases were simple (P=0.857). Regular diet was resumed after 1.7 days in the SILA group, 1.1 days in CLA (P=0.018). Length of stay was 2.9 days for SILA, 2.4 days for CLA (P=0.144). Seven children required hospital readmission, 5 SILA and 2 CLA (P=0.244). Five of the children who returned had intra-abdominal abscesses, of whom 4 had SILA. There was no difference in cost. The operative techniques had similar outcomes and operative times. There was a trend toward more intra-abdominal abscesses in the SILA group. Further study and longer follow up is needed to determine if there is an advantage to one laparoscopic approach over another.

Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial (SCAR trial).

Introduction:Although single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) was introduced decades ago, it is still considered a difficult technique to perform compared to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). In addition, controversy about the benefits of SILA compared to CLA abound and no definite criteria for choosing SILA over CLA in patients with appendicitis currently exist. Therefore, we have planned a multi-center randomized controlled trial to compare SILA with CLA in terms of cosmetic satisfaction and pain reduction.Methods and analysis:Patients diagnosed with appendicitis at the participating centers will be recruited and allocated into either a CLA or an SILA groups using a 1:1 randomization. Patients in the CLA group will receive a conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy and patients in the SILA group will receive a laparoscopic appendectomy using a single-incision at the umbilicus. The primary trial endpoint is cosmetic satisfaction assessed using the Patients and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) administered 6 weeks post-surgery. Secondary trial endpoints include cosmetic satisfaction assessed via the Body Image Questionnaire, pain levels assessed via the Visual Analog Scale and International Pain Outcomes questionnaire, and the presence of postoperative complications. The target sample size of this superiority trial is 120 patients, as this will provide 80% power at the 2.5% level of significance to detect a 3-point difference in POSAS.Discussion:The results of this planned multi-center randomized controlled trial will provide substantive evidence to help surgeons choose when to use SILA over CLA in patients with appendicitis.Ethics and dissemination:This trial was approved by the institutional review board at Daegu joint on February 27, 2020 (No: 19-12-001-001) and registered with the clinical research information service (CRIS) (KCT0005048). The results of the study will be published and presented at appropriate conferences.HighlightsTo investigate the clinical benefits comparing between single incision laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional laparoscopic appendectomyTo assess the pain and cosmetic satisfaction through quantitative scales, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs), International Pain Outcome (IPO) Questionnaire, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and the Body Image Questionnaire (BIQ)To help surgeons choose when to use single incision laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with appendicitis.

Easily Applicable Single-incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy Using Straightforward Instrumental Alignment and Conventional Laparoscopic Instruments.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is one of the most frequently performed operations. As such, single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is indicated as a feasible and safe procedure comparable to conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). However, novice surgeons face challenges in performing SILA, because the role of the surgeon's hands is reversed. We introduce an easily applicable technique of SILA by adapting the alignment of CLA. A series of 61 consecutive patients underwent SILA between January 2019 and December 2019 by 4 surgeons at Bundang CHA Medical Center. Acute appendicitis was diagnosed preoperatively by abdomino-pelvis computed tomography or ultrasonography. During the operation, a 3-channel Glove port was used with conventional laparoscopic instruments. The study participants consisted of 32 males and 29 females, with a mean age of 26.8 years (range, 4 to 66 y). The mean body mass index was 20.79 kg/m2 (range, 11.89 to 27.04 kg/m2). The mean operation time was 37.5±17.0 minutes. There was only 1 case of conversion with 1 additional port. Eight patients (13.1%) experienced postoperative complications defined by Dindo-Clavien-Strasberg classification: grade 1 wound complication in 7 patients and grade 2 postoperative bowel obstruction in 1 patient. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 2.5±1.3 days. Alignment of the instruments during CLA was successfully implemented into a SILA. Our new, easily applicable SILA technique will decrease the learning curve for novice surgeons in performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery.

A Comparative Study Between Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendicectomy Using Conventional Instruments and Glove-Port (SILACIG) and Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Appendicectomy (CMLA).

IntroductionAppendicectomy is the most common surgical procedure. Conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy being time-tested, attempts were made to make it less invasive. Single-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy is the most recent trend. The present study is conducted with the aim to compare surgical outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic appendicectomy using conventional instruments and glove-port (SILACIG) with conventional multiport laparoscopic appendicectomy (CMLA).Materials and methodsA total of 80 patients with appendicitis were recruited and underwent SILACIG (n=40) and CMLA (n=40). They were monitored for operative time, time of oral intake, pain on the second postoperative day, day of discharge, return to work, and scar size after two months.ResultsThere was no significant difference between SILACIG and CMLA in terms of the time of oral intake, day of discharge, and return to work. Operative time was significantly more in the SILACIG group as compared to CMLA. Pain on the second postoperative day was less than CMLA, and the size of the operative scar was significantly smaller than 2 cm in the SILACIG group as compared to the CMLA group.ConclusionSILACIG is a feasible, safe, and cost-effective technique. It is comparable with CMLA in terms of preoperative diagnosis, postoperative oral intake, hospitalization period, and return to work. It shows less pain on the second postoperative day and cosmetic benefit but requires more operative time than CMLA.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is an appropriate initial way in acute appendicitis surgery

Aim and design Appendectomy is the treatment of acute appendicitis and still has no standard surgical technique. The purpose of this study is to compare conventional open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) techniques, in terms of different parameters. Patients and methods A total of 169 patients were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the OA (n=85) and the LA (n=84) groups. Groups were compared in terms of age, sex, BMI, Charlson comorbidity index, leukocyte levels, C-reactive protein levels, and operative findings. Results There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of sex (P=0.006) and leukocytosis (P=0.009). The number of female patients was found to be higher in the LA group, and more leukocytosis was seen in the OA group. The operation time was shorter in the OA group (P=0.001). Considering the complication rates, there was a statistically significant difference against the OA group (P=0.042). Conclusions LA has higher recovery rates, has fewer complication rates, requires shorter hospital stay, and provides advantage in patients with high comorbidity. In acute appendicitis, first option in surgical intervention should be LA. Therefore, it is recommended that LA learning curve of the general surgery residents should be increased.

Comparing the Postoperative Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Three Port Appendectomy With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Acute Appendicitis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

The objective of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and 3-port conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol. Of 101 laparoscopic appendectomy with ERAS protocol cases for appendicitis from March 2019 to April 2020, 54 patients underwent SILA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 1) while 47 patients received CLA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 2). SILA and CLA were compared with the single institution's ERAS protocol. To adjust for baseline differences and selection bias, operative outcomes and complications were compared after propensity score matching (PSM). After 1:1 PSM, well-matched 35 patients in each group were evaluated. Postoperative hospital stays for patients in group 1 (1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.037) were significantly lesser than those for patients in group 2. However, opioid consumption (2.0 mg vs. 1.4 mg, P=0.1) and the postoperative scores of visual analogue scale for pain at 6 hours (2.4±1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.260) and 12 hours (2.4 ± 2.0 vs. 2.9 ± 1.5, P = 0.257) did not show significant difference between the 2 groups. SILA resulted in shortening the length of hospitalization without increase in complications or readmission rates compared to CLA with ERAS protocol.

Comparing the Postoperative Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Three Port Appendectomy With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Acute Appendicitis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

PurposeThe objective of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and 3-port conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol.MethodsOf 101 laparoscopic appendectomy with ERAS protocol cases for appendicitis from March 2019 to April 2020, 54 patients underwent SILA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 1) while 47 patients received CLA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 2). SILA and CLA were compared with the single institution’s ERAS protocol. To adjust for baseline differences and selection bias, operative outcomes and complications were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).ResultsAfter 1:1 PSM, well-matched 35 patients in each group were evaluated. Postoperative hospital stays for patients in group 1 (1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.037) were significantly lesser than those for patients in group 2. However, opioid consumption (2.0 mg vs. 1.4 mg, P=0.1) and the postoperative scores of visual analogue scale for pain at 6 hours (2.4±1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.260) and 12 hours (2.4 ± 2.0 vs. 2.9 ± 1.5, P = 0.257) did not show significant difference between the 2 groups.ConclusionSILA resulted in shortening the length of hospitalization without increase in complications or readmission rates compared to CLA with ERAS protocol.

Comparison of single incision with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a retrospective analysis between similarly matched cohort with review of literature

Appendicitis is a common disease in paediatric age group. Surgical management by way of appendectomy is the gold standard of treatment. Introduction of minimally invasive approach via laparoscopic technique has revolutionised the surgical management of this condition. In this paper we compare between single incision versus conventional approach for laparoscopic appendectomy. This was a retrospective review and analysis of a prospectively maintained database. The cohort was matched for age and sex. The total number of patients (n = 29) were divided into two groups. Group A (n = 15) underwent single incision laparoscopic appendectomy and group B (n = 14) underwent appendectomy via the conventional laparoscopic approach. The patient data was selected from patients who underwent appendectomy from July 2015 to December 2019. The data was analysed on various parameters like operative time, post-operative complications, starting of oral feeds, ambulation time, hospital stay, etc. The findings were compared using various statistical tools and conclusions drawn accordingly. There was a significant difference in operative times by the two approaches. The results showed no significant differences in the two approaches with respect to post-operative mobilization, feeding and recovery. The difference in the operative time can be attributed primarily to the complexity of cases that were operated by either approach. Minimally invasive laparoscopic technique is the standard of care for appendectomy in today’s age. Both single incision and conventional approach can be used for removal of appendix as there is no significant difference between the two methods. The single incision approach gives a better cosmetic result and can be better suited in uncomplicated appendicitis, whereas the conventional approach is more suitable for complicated cases.