Conventional Three-port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Research Articles

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.

Comparative Study of Single Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) using Conventional Instruments versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Background: Laparoscopic surgery has become the procedure of choice for treating appendicitis. But in this evolving era, single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendicitis is gaining importance because of its cosmetic benefits. So, here we compared outcomes of two laparoscopic surgeries in terms of intraoperative time, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative tolerance to diet, postoperative complications &amp; cosmesis. Method: A total of 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were studied. Patients were grouped under 2 categories randomly, group A undergoing single incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) &amp; group B undergoing conventional three port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA). Post operatively, duration of surgery, post-operative time, post-operative hospital stay, tolerance to diet, patients satisfaction were monitored. Result: Our study included 100 patients- 50 in group A(SILA) &amp; 50 in group B(CLA). Duration of surgery was significantly longer in group A as compared to group B(42.77 min vs 35.47 min ; p&lt;0.001). Patients had significantly lower pain score at 24 hours postoperatively in group A as compared to group B(3.38 vs 4.62, p&lt;0.001). Post-surgical complications in terms of superficial surgical site infection were more in group A(4 vs 2, p ). There was no significant difference in postoperative hospital stay and tolerance to oral feed postoperatively. There was no conversion to open appendectomy in both the groups. There was significant higher patients satisfaction score in group A patients (8.40 vs 6.12, p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: In addition to better cosmesis after SILA, SILA inflicts considerable less pain postoperatively than CLA with no significant differences in postoperative tolerance to oral diet, surgical site complications &amp; hospital stay.

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.

SP3.1.13 Does Single-port laparoscopic appendicectomy provide better outcomes compared to conventional (three-ports) laparoscopic appendicectomy?

Abstract Aims To evaluate comparative outcomes of single port laparoscopic appendicectomy (SPLA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (CLA) in the management of acute appendicitis. Methods A comprehensive systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with subsequent meta-analysis of outcomes were conducted following PRISMA standards. Post-operative pain, cosmesis, need for an additional port(s), operative time, Post-operative complications, length of hospital stay(LOS), readmission, and reoperation were the evaluated outcome parameters. Results Sixteen RCTs reporting a total number of 2017 patients who underwent SPLA(n = 1009) or CLA(n = 1008) were included. SPLA showed higher cosmetic score (Mean Difference (MD) 1.11,P= 0.03) but significantly longer operative time (MD 7.08, P = 0.00001) compared to CLA. However, there was no significant difference between SPLA and CLA group in the postoperative pain score at 12 hours (MD -0.13,P=0.69), need for additional port(s) (Risk Ratio (RR)0.03, P = 0.07), postoperative ileus (RR 0.74,P=0.51), SSI ( RR 1.38, P = 0.28), Post-operative intra-abdominal collection (RR 0.00,P=0.62), LOS ( MD -2.41, P = 0.16), readmission to the hospital ( RR 0.45,P=0.22), and return to theatre (RR -0.00, P = 0.49). Subgroup analysis showed that operative time was comparable in adults only subgroup (P = 0.18) while it was significantly loner in paediatrics only subgroup(P = 0.00001). Moreover, LOS was shorter in adults only subgroup (P = 0.003) and no difference observed in paediatrics only subgroup (P = 0.93). Conclusion SPLA is associated with a slightly longer operative time; however, its efficacy and safety are comparable to CLA. Subgroup analysis showed that SPLA has better outcome in adults than paediatrics. Additionally, SPLA offers better post-operative cosmesis.

Comparative study on surgical outcomes of needle port assisted two port laparoscopic appendicectomy verses conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy

Background: Conventional three port laparoscopic appendicectomy is fast becoming a procedure of choice for appendicitis. Needle port assisted two port laparoscopic appendicectomy is the procedure with similar technique as conventional procedure but has its distinctive advantages. The present study aims to compare the results of needle port assisted two port and conventional three port laparoscopic appendicectomy.Methods: In comparative non-randomized study patients with acute appendicitis, recurrent appendicitis and patients posted for interval appendicectomy of age &gt;18 years, both gender without co-morbidity were enrolled as subjects. Non-consenting patients were excluded. The study factor was needle port assisted two port and conventional three port laparoscopic appendicectomy procedure. The allocation to each procedure was done at random. The outcome factors were compared between both groups.Results: A total of 91 patients with a mean age of 29.77 years and F:M ratio of 1.67:1 were enrolled, of them 31 underwent needle port assisted two port laparoscopic appendicectomy. The mean operative time for two port was 53.38±7.97 min as compared to conventional three port was 44.65±5.86 min which was statistically significant but cosmetic outcome was better as well as statistically significant with two port procedure. The post-operative pain, intra-operative and post-operative complications were compared between these groups but were statistically not significant.Conclusions: Needle port assisted two port laparoscopic appendicectomy appears to give better cosmetic results and can be a good surgical alternative modality for uncomplicated appendicitis.

LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDECTOMY;

Background: Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) is a modern and safe improvement in field of laparoscopic surgery. Single incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is a major breakthrough in MIS and has become standard procedure for acute appendicitis in place of conventional three port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA). Objectives: To see the potential advantages in terms of operative time, duration of hospital stay, post-operative pain and cosmetic results in SILA and CTLA groups. Study Design: Randomized control study. Setting: Department of General Surgery in Allama Iqbal Medical College/ Jinnah Hospital Lahore. Period: July 2016 to June 2017. Materials and Methods: 48 patients were divided in two groups; group SILA (cases) and CTLA (control). Each group comprised 24 patients. All cases were performed by consultant who were competent enough and trained in MIS. Results: We found that there was statistically no difference in operative time (p&gt;0.05) and post-operative pain (p&gt;0.05) of both procedures but statistically significant outcome was observed in duration of hospital stay (p&lt;0.005) and cosmetic result (p&lt; 0.005). Post-operative analgesia usage was same in both groups with similar outcome of control. Surgical wound healed in all patients of both groups without complication but noticeably had shown no scar mark on three months follow up in patients of SILA group. Almost all patients in SILA group were discharged on same day on oral diet. Conclusion: This study showed that results of SILA are better in terms of cosmoses and less duration of hospital stay in the presence of non-significant operative time of two procedures. Staying with promise of minimizing in MIS to SILA, cosmetic satisfaction and minimal hospital stay are its comprehensible advantages.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children And Conversion to Multiport Appendectomy

BackgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) in the pediatric population has been well described. Our children's hospital has adopted this modality for nearly all appendectomies. From our center's experience, we hoped to identify factors that portend conversion from SILA to multiport appendectomy. We compared our cohort of conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) for outcomes including operative time, postop length of stay (LOS), complications, and readmission. Materials and methodsA retrospective chart review of patients who underwent appendectomy from 2012 to 2017 at our children's hospital was performed. The type of appendectomy performed, if the case required conversion to multiple ports, and perforation status were recorded. Demographic data identified included age, sex, and body mass index. Outcomes analyzed were operative time, LOS, and postoperative complication/readmission rate. ResultsOf 1001 appendectomies performed, 959 (95.9%) were initiated with plan for SILA, and 35 (3.5%) were initiated CLA. Of those initiated SILA, 884/959 (92.2%) were completed without additional port placement. Cases which were not able to be completed SILA were statistically significantly more likely to be male patients, have increased body mass index, or perforated appendicitis. When compared to cases initiated CLA, SILA remained statistically similar for readmission and LOS but had significantly faster operative time. ConclusionsSILA appears to be a safe and efficient modality for the treatment of appendicitis in pediatric populations with no increased morbidity. Parents of children who are obese, males, or present with perforation should be counseled regarding the possibility of additional port placement or considered for initiating conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

Evaluation of Single-Incision Multiport Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SIMPLA) Performed with Conventional Equipment

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has emerged as a new method of minimally invasive surgery. SILS appendectomy (SILA) is practiced worldwide, and some studies have proven its cosmetic benefit over conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) but at higher expense. We evaluate the feasibility of single-incision multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (SIMPLA) with conventional laparoscopic equipment as the perfect cost-effective replacement of both conventional laparoscopic and standard SILA. Since June 2014 to January 2016, total 57 patients underwent SIMPLA. We did a retrospective observational study of the prospectively maintained data of patients who underwent SIMPLA. We have analyzed all the demographic and clinicopathological aspects and reviewed the literature to compare with SILA. The mean operating time was 42.71 ± 5.75 min to perform SIMPLA which is equivalent to SILA with a conversion rate 12.28%. There were minimal intra-operative blood loss, post-operative pain, other peri-operative complications, and length of hospital stay. The mean cosmesis score after SIMPLA was more than eight in post-operative period till the end of 6 months. The cost to perform SIMPLA is much less than SILA in all the patients. The SIMPLA procedure, though it is taking a little higher time than usual, is giving a better cosmesis at a much lower cost which is making this procedure affordable and acceptable in developing countries.

Comparison of Two-Port Verses Three-Port Laparoscopic Appendicectomy in CCM Medical and Hospital

One of the most common cause of acute abdomen is acute appendicitis. A concept of ‘‘scarless’’ abdomen first described in 1998 by Esposito by Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery was and has gained popularity. Still appendectomy is performed by laparotomy in most of the countries, causes may be the cost of the instruments or availability and affordability by the patients. Laparoscopic appendectomies are gaining popularity because of decreased pain, fewer postoperative complications, earlier mobilization, shorter hospitalization, earlier return to work, and better cosmesis. The aim of the study is to compare operative time, intra and post -operative complications, hospital stay after surgery in patients with two-port laparoscopic appendicectomy with the conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy and to describe this technique for performing laparoscopic appendectomy with three portals at very low cost and with good aesthetic appearance and to compare the results with the conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy.&#x0D; Material and Methods - Patients over the age of 18 with a diagnosis of acute abdomen, later on confirmed to acute appendicitis were included in the study. Out of 50 patients with laparoscopic appendicectomy, 23 for two port appendicectomy and 27 three port were included in the study. Hasson's technique was adopted for laproscopic access in to the abdomen. 10-mm umbilical port and 5-mm port was inserted with a grasper. Through the umbilical working trocar mesoappendix transected base of the appendix was ligated and the appendix was resected.&#x0D; Results - 23 cases performed using the two-port technique and 27 cases were performed using conventional 3 port technique. Operative time in two port appendicectomy (n=23) was 58±3.6 while in Conventional 3 port appendicectomy (n = 27) it was 52±2.4. Hospital stay for patients with two port appendicectomy was shorter and statistically significant.&#x0D; Conclusion - Two port appendicectomy is a safe and cost effective procedure and no major complications were found in this procedure.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy by Surgical Trainees.

Background:Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) is one of the most commonly performed single port surgeries in the world. However, there are few publications documenting a young resident’s experience. The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes of SILA performed by a surgical trainee and to evaluate its feasibility and safety compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TPLA) when performed by a surgical trainee and SILA by surgical staff.Methods:Between September 2014 and August 2015, clinical data were retrospectively collected for SILA and TPLA cases performed at Chung-Ang University Hospital. Three surgical residents who have assisted at least 50 cases of TPLA and 30 cases of SILA performed by gastrointestinal surgery specialists performed the surgeries. The indication of SILA by surgical trainees was noncomplicated appendicitis with no comorbidity.Results:In total, 47 patients underwent SILA by surgical residents, 98 patients underwent TPLA by surgical residents and 137 patients underwent SILA by surgical staff. In comparing SILA and TPLA performed by surgical residents, the mean age was younger (26 vs. 41 y, P<0.005) in the SILA group, the operative time (47.2 vs. 61.5 min, P<0.010) and hospital stay (2.3 vs. 2.7 d, P=0.003) were shorter in SILA group. In the SILA group, 2 cases of postoperative fluid collection (5.7%) occurred, necessitating antibiotic treatment. In TPLA group, 1 postoperative abscess occurred, requiring drainage. When comparing SILA performed by surgical residents and SILA performed by surgical staff, there were no significant differences in operation time, and postoperative complications.Conclusion:Surgical residents safely performed SILA with good postoperative outcomes after short learning curve.

Implementation of single incision laparoscopic appendectomy at a tertiary institution in the Bahamas

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the inauguration of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) for un-complicated appendicitis and demonstrate its efficacy and safety.METHODS: Thirty-two patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic appendectomy between January 2014 and December 2014 were compared retrospectively with 20 prior consecutive patients who underwent surgery in the three-port manner. Length of hospital stay, operative time, conversion rate, and complications were used as the indicators of effective implementation. RESULTS: Demographics were similar between the single-port and three-port groups. In the SILA series, operative duration was unchanged after the first 10 cases. An operative duration less than that of the conventional three-port method could be achieved after 30 casesCONCLUSIONS: Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe and feasible procedure. The learning curve could be overcome safely without major complications. Our preliminary analysis showed that 30 cases are sufficient to achieve an equivalent operative duration compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

Clinical efficacy of single-incision and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a Meta analysis

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of single-incision and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.Methods According to the Cochrane systematic review methods,literatures on the comparison of the effects of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA) were searched for in the PubMed,EMBASE,the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register,CNKI,CBM and VIP database.Data including the operation time,pain visual analogue scales scores,duration of postoperative hospital stay,incidence of postoperative complications,mean time of hospital stay and cost between the SILA and CTLA were compared by 2 reviewers.RevMan 4.2 software was used for Meta analysis,and the heterogeneity of the study was analyzed using the 12 test.Categorical variables were presented by odds ratio and 95％ confidence interval (95％ CI),and continuous variables were presented by weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95％C1.Results Eight randomized controlled trials including 1 444 patients were selected.All the patients were subdivided into the adults group (760 patients) and the children group (684 patients).A total of 721 patients received SILA (SILA group) and 723 received CTLA (CTLA group).The operation time of patients who received SILA in the adults group and the children group were significantly longer than those who received CTLA (WMD =4.40,7.39,95％ CI:2.14-6.66,2.16-12.61,P ＜0.05).There were no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scales scores,incidence of postoperative complications and duration of hospital stay between patients who received SILA and CTLA in the adults group and the children group (WMD =-0.34,95 ％ CI:-1.02-0.33,OR=0.97,95％CI:0.64-1.47; WMD=-0.19,95％CI:-1.14-0.76,P＞0.05).The cost of patients who received SILA was significantly higher than those who received CTLA in the children group (WMD =0.87,95 ％ CI:0.26-1.48,P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions There is no obvious advantages of SILA in perioperative and postoperative outcomes when compared with CTLA.Therefore,SILA is only a possible alternative to CTLA other than the preferred method. Key words: Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Laparoscopy, single-incision ; Randomized controlled trials ; Meta analysis

Surgical Outcomes of Single-port Laparoscopic Appendectomy versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children: Preliminary Report of a Prospective Randomized Trial

Purpose: Currently the substantial clinical benefits of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SLA) over conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) are equivocal. The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes between SLA and CLA in children with acute appendicitis. Methods: A single blind prospective randomized single center study was performed to compare the surgical outcomes of SLA and CLA. A total of 105 patients were randomized and various parameters were analyzed, 52 patients with SLA and 53 patients with CLA between July 2013 and March 2014. Patients with sonographically confirmed acute appendicitis were randomly assigned to receive either SLA or CLA. The outcome measurements were operating time, wound complication, and intraperitoneal morbidities, postoperative pain score and cosmetic result score. Results: Operating time is significantly longer in SLA (70.4±26.7 minutes vs. 58.0±23.4 minutes; p=0.016). There were no significant differences in the postoperative wound complication rate and intraperitoneal morbidities between two groups. There were no significant differences in postoperative resting pain score (6.6±2.5 vs. 6.3±2.5; p=0.317) and activity pain score (6.9±2.4 vs. 6.3±2.5; p=0.189), and the cosmetic result score (9.2±1.1 vs. 9.1±1.4; p=0.853). Conclusion: Although SLA would be a safe and feasible procedure in children, SLA could not demonstrate the clear benefit over CLA.

Comparison between single-incision and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis from eight RCTs

To assess the efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA), we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA). RCTs comparing the effects of SILA and CTLA were searched for in PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. Operative time, the pain visual analogue scales scores (VAS scores), dose of analgesics, postoperative complications, hospital charges, and duration of postoperative hospitalization in SILA and CTLA were pooled and compared by meta-analysis. Odds ratios and weighted mean differences (WMDs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the effect of SILA. Eight original RCTs investigating 760 adults and 684 children, 1,444 patients in total, of whom 721 received SILA only and 723 received CTLA only, met the inclusion criteria. Both in adults and children, the mean operative time was significantly longer in SILA than CTLA (WMD5.45, 95% CI 2.15 to 8.75, p = 0.01). Compared with CTLA, in children, SILA have higher analgesic consumption (WMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.3, p = 0.03) and greater hospital charges (WMD 0.87, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.48, p = 0.005), which was not statistically different in adults (p > 0.05). Pooling the results for SILA and CTLA revealed no significant difference in VAS scores, wound infection rate, overall complications, and postoperative hospital stay. SILA failed to show any obvious advantages over CTLA in perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Therefore, it represents a possible alternative to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

Learning Curve of Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Noncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: A Preliminary Analysis Compared with Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy

The aim of this study was to delineate the learning curve of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy for noncomplicated appendicitis. Thirty patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic appendectomy between July 2009 and June 2010 were compared retrospectively with 30 prior consecutive patients who underwent surgery in the three-port manner. Operative duration, number of conversions, time to resumption of oral intake, length of hospital stay, and complications were used as the indicators of the learning curve. Demographics were similar between the single-port and three-port groups. A significant decrease in operative duration was noted after a surgical experience of 10 patients. An operative duration equivalent to that of the conventional three-port method could be achieved after 30 cases. Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy is a safe and feasible procedure. The learning curve could be overcome safely without major complications. Our preliminary analysis showed that 30 cases are sufficient to achieve an equivalent operative duration compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

Conventional Laparoscopic Appendicectomy and Laparoscope-Assisted Appendicectomy: a Comparative Study.

Laparoscopic procedures for removal of the appendix by the three-port technique as an alternative to conventional appendicectomy have gained wide popularity, but they have been criticized for technical difficulty, more time consumption, and high cost. We have compared conventional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) and laparoscope-assisted appendicectomy (LAA). In period from August 2010 to January 2012, 77 patients underwent appendicectomy by a minimally invasive procedure (39 LA and 38 LAA), at Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata. All the 39 cases of LA were completed successfully, but of the 38 cases, LAA could be completed only in 32 cases. Of the six cases where LAA could not be completed, five were converted to LA [three because of excessive body mass index (BMI) and two because of bleeding]. One case had to be converted to open appendicectomy because of excessive bleeding. In LA, the mean duration of surgery was less than that in LAA (18.18 versus 24.39min). Wound infections were more common in LAA compared to LA (six versus two). Severe postoperative pain was present in eight cases in LAA compared to two in LA. On day 2, 79.487% patients undergoing LA were discharged compared to 28.947% in LAA. LA is better as a minimally invasive procedure. LAA can only be done in patients with lower BMI, is more time consuming, has more complications, more incidence of postoperative pain, wound infections, and longer hospital stay.

A comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: from the diagnosis to the hospital cost

PurposeRecently many cases of appendectomy have been conducted by single-incision laparoscopic technique. The aim of this study is to figure out the benefits of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA) compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA).MethodsFrom 2010 to 2012, 89 patients who were diagnosed as acute appendicitis and then underwent laparoscopic appendectomy a single surgeon were enrolled in this study and with their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Cases of complicated appendicitis confirmed on imaging tools and patients over 3 points on the American Society of Anesthesia score were excluded.ResultsAmong the total of 89 patients, there were 51 patients in the TULA group and 38 patients in the CTLA group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) of postoperative day (POD) #1 was higher in the TULA group than in the CTLA group (P = 0.048). The operative time and other variables had no statistical significances (P > 0.05).ConclusionDespite the insufficiency of instruments and the difficulty of handling, TULA was not worse in operative time, VAS after POD #2, and the total operative cost than CTLA. And, if there are no disadvantages of TULA, TULA may be suitable in substituting three-port laparoscopic surgery and could be considered as one field of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery with the improvement and development of the instruments and revised studies.

A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial of Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Access Versus Conventional 3-Port Appendectomy

The aim of the current study was to perform a multicentered prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing laparoendoscopic single-site access (LESS) versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TPLA). The clinical benefits and disadvantages of LESS appendectomy are uncertain. Between October 2009 and March 2011, consecutive patients admitted with clinical or radiological evidence of appendicitis were randomly assigned to receive either LESS or TPLA. The main outcome measurement was overall pain score. Secondary outcome measurements included operative time, conversion rates, morbidity rates, activity pain scores, activity scores, patient satisfaction, and cosmesis scores. During the study period, 200 patients were recruited to the study. There were no significant differences in the morbidity rates, operative time, conversion rates, and postoperative recovery. There were also no differences in the overall pain score and pain score at rest. However, patients in the LESS group experienced significantly more pain upon coughing or standing and required more intravenous analgesics (P = 0.001, 0.038, and 0.035, respectively). Wound cosmesis and satisfaction scores on the contrary were better in the LESS group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.052). No differences in the quality-of-life assessments were present at 2 weeks after operation. LESS and conventional appendectomy resulted in similar perioperative outcomes. However, LESS appendectomy resulted in worst pain scores upon exertion and required a higher dosage of intravenous analgesics when compared with TPLA. On the contrary, wound cosmesis and satisfaction scores were better in the LESS group. Hence, adoption of the technique for appendectomy will depend on patient preferences and the presence of local expertise.

Pain after laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparison of transumbilical single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgery

PurposeConventional laparoscopic appendectomy is performed using three ports, and single-port appendectomy is an attractive alternative in order to improve cosmesis. The aim of this study was to compare pain after transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SA) with pain after conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TA).MethodsFrom April to September 2011, 50 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for simple appendicitis without gangrene or perforation. Patients who had undergone appendectomy with a drainage procedure were excluded. The type of surgery was chosen based on patient preference after written informed consent was obtained. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain evaluated by the visual analogue scale score and postoperative analgesic use. Operative time, recovery of bowel function, and length of hospital stay were secondary outcome measures.ResultsSA using a SILS port (Covidien) was performed in 17 patients. The other 33 patients underwent TA. Pain scores in the 24 hours after surgery were higher in patients who underwent SA (P = 0.009). The change in postoperative pain score over time was significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.021). SA patients received more total doses of analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) in the 24 hours following surgery, but the difference was not statistically significant. The median operative time was longer for SA (P < 0.001).ConclusionLaparoscopic surgeons should be concerned about longer operation times and higher immediate postoperative pain scores in patients who undergo SA.