Emergency Laparoscopic Appendectomy Research Articles

Laparoscopic appendectomy with left lateral tilt in pregnant women in the second and third trimesters: A clinical case series in a single Vietnam centre

IntroductionThe presentation of acute appendicitis during pregnancy may cause diagnostic and therapeutic difficulty. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is widely accepted as a minimally invasive procedure for acute appendicitis. However, LA during the second and third trimesters is associated with problems, including technical difficulty, a risk of foetal loss and preterm delivery. MethodClinical data were retrospectively collected and analysed between April 2016 and April 2021. A telephone questionnaire was administered in cases of missing data. The clinical information obtained included a detailed medical and obstetric history; preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data; complications; and pregnancy outcomes. ResultsThere were a total of eighteen patients in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters who had undergone emergent laparoscopic appendectomy with a left lateral tilt of 70–90°. The gestational age at the time of surgery ranged from 20 to 35 weeks. The time to complete the first trocar for the camera ranged from 3 to 6 min, the operation time ranged from 30 to 60 min, and the length of hospital stay was 2–8 days. There were 5 procedures performed in the 3rd trimester. None of the cases required conversion to an open procedure, and all were without postoperative complications. Only one miscarriage complication was reported among a total of 4 patients with peritonitis. ConclusionOur results demonstrated that urgent laparoscopic surgeries are feasible and can be safely performed with minimal risk for patients and foetuses in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Larger prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Abdominal drainage to prevent intra-peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.

This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015 and last updated in 2018. Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed primarily for acute appendicitis. Patients who undergo appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, are more likely to suffer postoperative complications. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial. To assess the safety and efficacy of abdominal drainage to prevent intraperitoneal abscess after appendectomy (irrespective of open or laparoscopic) for complicated appendicitis; to compare the effects of different types of surgical drains; and to evaluate the optimal time for drain removal. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, the World Health Organization International Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and three trials registers on 24 February 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage versus no drainage in people undergoing emergency open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. We also included RCTs that compared different types of drains and different schedules for drain removal in people undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess evidence certainty. We included intraperitoneal abscess as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were wound infection, morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, hospital costs, pain, and quality of life. Use of drain versus no drain We included six RCTs (521 participants) comparing abdominal drainage and no drainage in participants undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The studies were conducted in North America, Asia, and Africa. The majority of participants had perforated appendicitis with local or general peritonitis. All participants received antibiotic regimens after open appendectomy. None of the trials was assessed as at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effects of abdominal drainage versus no drainage on intraperitoneal abscess at 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 3.21; 5 RCTs; 453 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or wound infection at 30 days (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.56; 5 RCTs; 478 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were seven deaths in the drainage group (N = 183) compared to one in the no-drainage group (N = 180), equating to an increase in the risk of 30-day mortality from 0.6% to 2.7% (Peto odds ratio 4.88, 95% CI 1.18 to 20.09; 4 RCTs; 363 participants; low-certainty evidence). Abdominal drainage may increase 30-day overall complication rate (morbidity; RR 6.67, 95% CI 2.13 to 20.87; 1 RCT; 90 participants; low-certainty evidence) and hospital stay by 2.17 days (95% CI 1.76 to 2.58; 3 RCTs; 298 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to no drainage. The outcomes hospital costs, pain, and quality of life were not reported in any of the included studies. There were no RCTs comparing the use of drain versus no drain in participants undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Open drain versus closed drain There were no RCTs comparing open drain versus closed drain for complicated appendicitis. Early versus late drain removal There were no RCTs comparing early versus late drain removal for complicated appendicitis. The certainty of the currently available evidence is low to very low. The effect of abdominal drainage on the prevention of intraperitoneal abscess or wound infection after open appendectomy is uncertain for patients with complicated appendicitis. The increased rates for overall complication rate and hospital stay for the drainage group compared to the no-drainage group are based on low-certainty evidence. Consequently, there is no evidence for any clinical improvement with the use of abdominal drainage in patients undergoing open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The increased risk of mortality with drainage comes from eight deaths observed in just under 400 recruited participants. Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine the effects of drainage on morbidity and mortality outcomes.

Premenarchal Adolescent Female Ovarian Torsion: A Case of Delayed Diagnosis

Patient: Female, 11-year-old Final Diagnosis: Ovarian Symptoms: Abdomenal • pain Medication: — Clinical Procedure: — Specialty: Surgery Objective: Mistake in diagnosis Background:Ovarian torsion is a rare surgical emergency in premenarchal girls. Early diagnosis and surgical detorsion are required to restore blood flow and limit tissue damage.Case Report:Here, we present a case of ovarian torsion and appendicitis in an 11-year-old premenarchal girl who presented to our emergency room with a 4-day history of right iliac fossa pain, limping, and fever. Upon initial evaluation in our hospital, her vital signs were stable and clinical examination revealed abdominal guarding and right lower quadrant rebound tenderness with positive Rovsing’s sign. Abdominal ultrasound and computed tomography scans showed adnexal cysts and torsion, an inflamed appendix, and free fluid in the abdomen. Intraoperative findings included a twisted gangrenous ovary and an edematous appendix. The patient underwent emergency laparoscopic oophorectomy and appendectomy.Conclusions:This case demonstrates that reactive appendicitis can occur secondary to inflammation of adjacent structures such as the ovary.

Defining the treatment strategy for uncomplicated appendicitis based on patient satisfaction feedback: A cross-sectional study

BackgroundTwo surgical strategies are available for appendicitis: emergency laparoscopic appendectomy and interval laparoscopic appendectomy. However, timing of surgical intervention remains debatable. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy and interval laparoscopic appendectomy and conduct a questionnaire survey to investigate the use of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy and patient satisfaction with regard to treatment. MethodsWe included 162 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at our hospital. Outcomes were assessed by operation time, blood loss, postoperative fasting time, length of hospital stay, and complication rate. Patient satisfaction was measured by questionnaire addressing degree of satisfaction, presurgery anxiety, and length of hospital stay. ResultsOf 162 patients, 74 (46%) and 88 (54%) received emergency and interval laparoscopic appendectomy, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the operation time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, or complication rate. Among 66 patients who responded to the questionnaire (28 emergency, 38 interval), a significant difference was observed only in the degree of satisfaction regarding the timing of the surgical intervention (p = 0.04). ConclusionSurgical outcomes of emergency and interval appendectomy were equivalent; however, patient satisfaction favored emergency appendectomy, suggesting it is a preferable approach for the treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis.

Surgical Outcomes of Interval Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Appendiceal Abscess and Predictors of Conversion to Open Surgery

The present study was performed to clarify the benefits of interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) for appendiceal abscess by comparison with emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (ELA), and to identify any risk factors associated with conversion to open ILA. Among 903 adult patients with acute appendicitis, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 58 patients with appendiceal abscess who had undergone either ILA after conservative treatment (ILA group; n = 44) or ELA (ELA group; n = 14). The two groups were compared with regard to surgical outcomes, and the risk factors for conversion to open surgery were also estimated in the ILA group. ILA was superior to ELA in terms of blood loss (median 5 ml vs. 50 ml; p < 0.01), rate of conversion to open surgery (16% vs. 43%; p < 0.05), postoperative hospital stay (median 4 days vs. 8 days; p < 0.01), and morbidity (7% vs. 36%; p < 0.01). In the ILA group, analysis of clinical factors showed that a higher C-reactive protein level, escalation of antibiotic treatment, and longer hospitalization during conservative treatment were significantly associated with conversion. Interval laparoscopic appendectomy following conservative treatment is less invasive and has lower morbidity. However, the presence of severe inflammation at the time of conservative treatment substantially affects conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial nonoperative management versus emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for acute complicated appendicitis

BackgroundThe evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management is growing. However, the best treatment strategy for acute complicated appendicitis remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis patients. This study sought to determine the most cost-effective strategy from the health care-payer’s perspective.MethodsThe primary outcome was an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) using nonoperative management with or without interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) as the intervention compared with operative management with emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (ELA) alone as the control. Model variables were abstracted from a literature review, and from data obtained from the hospital records of Tochigi Medical Center. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an ICER. We constructed a Markov model to compare treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis in otherwise-healthy adults, over a time horizon of a single year. Uncertainty surrounding model parameters was assessed via one-way- and probabilistic-sensitivity analyses. Threshold analysis was performed using the willingness-to-pay threshold set at the World Health Organization’s criterion of $107,690.ResultsThree meta-analysis were included in our analysis. Operative management cost $6075 per patient. Nonoperative management with interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) cost $984 more than operative management and produced only 0.005 more QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $182,587. Nonoperative management without ILA cost $235 more than operative management, and also yielded only 0.005 additional QALYs resulting in an ICER of $45,123 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 1000 draws resulted in average ICER of $172,992 in nonoperative management with ILA and $462,843 in Nonoperative management without ILA. The threshold analysis demonstrated that regardless of willingness-to-pay, nonoperative management without ILA would not be most cost-effective strategy.ConclusionsNonoperative management with ILA and Nonoperative management without ILA were not cost-effective strategies compared with operative management to treat complicated appendicitis. Based on our findings, operative management remains the standard of care and nonoperative management would be reconsidered as a treatment option in complicated appendicitis from economic perspective.

Tratamiento del infarto segmentario idiopático de epiplón mayor en el adulto mediante omentectomía laparoscópica

Introduction: idiopathic segmental infarction of the greater omentum constitutes an exceptional cause of an acute condition in adults.Clinical case: study presents the clinical case of a young adult who underwent an emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for the treamtent of acute apenditicis. The exploration revealed a segmental infarction of the greater omentum that was resolved by partial omentectomy. Evolution was good and the patient was allowed an early discharge.Discussion: despite the fact an image diagnosis of infarction of the greater omentum is possible, its low incidence and the characteristics of its clinical presentation result in it usually being diagnosed during surgery. Treatment consists in laparoscopic omentenctomy of the affected area. Preoperative diagnosis may allow for watchful waiting, although persistence of symptoms requires readmission to hospital and extension of the definitive treatment.

Identifying a Personalized Anesthetic with Fuzzy PROMETHEE.

ObjectivesDuring an anesthetic evaluation, the individual’s medical history and overall fitness for the whole medical procedure should be carefully examined. The objective of this study was to apply a multi-criteria decision-making technique to determine the proper anesthetic agent for specific patients.MethodsThe fuzzy PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment of Evaluations) method was applied to determine the most appropriate agent. Minimum alveolar concentration, blood:gas and oil:gas partition coefficients, onset of action, recovery time, duration, induction and maintenance doses, and washout time were used as the criteria for the analysis. After defining the values of each criteria, the criteria weights and the preference function were set, and finally the results for two different examples, one for general ranking and one for a specific individual were obtained.ResultsThe results show that nitrous oxide and xenon are among the preferred inhaled anesthetics in the ranking of the inhaled anesthetics, whereas midazolam was identified as the preferred injected agent. When the weights are selected according to a specific patient’s condition, namely a 70-year-old woman to undergo an emergent laparoscopic appendectomy with comorbidities, including severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as a consequence of a life-long smoking habit, morbid obesity, and type II diabetes, the results changed significantly. In this case, desflurane and etomidate come first in the ranking of inhaled and injected anesthetics, respectively, while nitrous oxide is the least preferred anesthetic agent.ConclusionsExpert opinion is always needed. Assigning weights to criteria and grading alternatives are the major challenges in multi-criteria decision-making studies. Fuzzy PROMETHEE is proposed to solve a multi-criteria decision-making problem in selecting a general anesthetic.

A study of pre-operative predictors for conversion to open surgery in emergency laparoscopic appendectomy

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergencies encountered by surgeons. Although laparoscopic appendectomy is the preferred approach complicated appendicitis with a mass, abscess or perforation do present with a challenge to the operating surgeon compelling him to convert to open surgery. Our study aimed at identifying pre-operative factors that would help us predict the risk of conversion to open surgery.Methods: This was a prospective analytical study. All cases admitted over a period of one year undergoing emergency appendectomy were included in the study. The duration of history, clinical presentation, laboratory and radiological investigations were noted. The reason for conversion to open surgery was recorded. The post-operative stay and complications were analyzed.Results: A total of 160 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in the study. The mean age was 33.78 years with a male preponderance of 58%. The duration of history, clinical and radiological evidence of complicated appendicitis and peritonitis, total leucocyte count and serum bilirubin levels were identified as pre-operative predictors for risk of conversion to open surgery from laparoscopic appendectomy.Conclusions: These predictors are useful in predicting conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic emergency appendectomy. In these cases, proceeding with an open surgical approach may be beneficial to the patient in reducing operative time, cost, hospital stay and complications as laparoscopic approach may prove to be unsuccessful. This would help in enhanced communication between the surgeon and the patient with respect to the outcome and prognosis.

Primary omental gangrene presenting as acute abdomen

Primary omental gangrene is a very rare but important cause of an acute abdomen. We came across a case of an acute abdomen which was taken up for emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy. On laparoscopy, torsion of the free part of the omentum, leading to distal gangrene, was found. Intraoperative diagnosis of primary omental gangrene was made. Preoperative diagnosis of this condition is difficult. Through our case report, we want to highlight about this rare cause of pain abdomen as knowledge of this pathology is important to the surgeon because it mimics the other common causes of the acute surgical abdomen.

Expedited discharge in uncomplicated acute appendicitis: Decreasing the length of stay while maintaining quality

BackgroundAn expedited discharge protocol for uncomplicated appendicitis was developed at a Canadian academic hospital to determine if patients could be safely discharged home early without negatively impacting care and patient satisfaction. MethodsA non-randomized prospective quality improvement project was completed between February 01, 2017 and January 31, 2018. The project included patients between 16 and 65 years with uncomplicated appendicitis managed with laparoscopic appendectomy. The primary outcome was average length of stay post PACU. 30 day ED visit, cross-sectional imaging and readmission rate were balancing measures. The CTM-3 tool was used to measure patient satisfaction. Results450 patients had emergent laparoscopic appendectomy. 287 (63.8%) patients met the project inclusion criteria. The average length of stay decreased 41.0% to 13.1 h. The 30 day ED visit, cross-sectional imaging and readmission rate were 9.8%, 4.5% and 1.0% respectively compared with 8.1%, 4.5% and 2.5% at baseline. Patient satisfaction was 3.72/4 compared to 3.74/4. ConclusionAn expedited discharge after an uncomplicated laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and feasible without a negative impact on 30-day ED visit, diagnostic imaging or readmission.

Use of a robotic camera holder (FreeHand®) for laparoscopic appendicectomy

Introduction: Use of a mechanical arm to hold the laparoscopic camera has many advantages. FreeHand® (FreeHand Ltd, Guildford, United Kingdom) is a robotic camera holder which uses head movement and infrared technology. This trial assessed the usefulness of FreeHand® in laparoscopic appendicectomy.Material and methods: This was a single center prospective cohort study on patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy using FreeHand®. Patient demographics, operative details, conversion to human camera holder and surgeon discomfort were recorded. Utilization of assistant time while not assisting was also recorded.Results: Twenty-two participants were included, with a mean age of 32 years and a mean BMI of 25.3. The mean set up time was nine minutes. There were five conversions to a manual camera holder (22.7%). There were 22 lens cleaning episodes with nine (40.9%) not requiring any lens cleaning and six (27.3%) requiring one clean. There were no peri-operative complications. Most surgeons reported minimal or no discomfort. Assistant’s time was used for ward work (57%), clerking patients (36%) and for a break (7%).Conclusions: FreeHand® can be safely used in laparoscopic appendicectomy. It provides a stable image, puts the surgeon in control of the surgical field, causes minimal user discomfort, and frees up personnel.

Efficacy of an Emergency Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Perforated Appendicitis without Abscess Formation in Comparison with the Open Approach

Efficacy of an Emergency Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Perforated Appendicitis without Abscess Formation in Comparison with the Open Approach

Superior mesenteric venous thrombophlebitis: A rare complication of a common disease

We would like to report a case of acute appendicitis complicated with superior mesenteric venous (SMV) thrombophlebitis. A 61‐year‐old gentleman presented with abdominal pain and high fever with elevated white cell count and slightly deranged liver function and clotting profile. Besides features of acute appendicitis, a thrombus in superior mesenteric vein was demonstrated on computed tomography (CT). Patient was treated with emergency laparoscopic appendectomy, a course of antibiotics and subcutaneous enoxaparin. CT 2 months after operation showed features of resolving SMV thrombophlebitis. Mesenteric venous thrombophlebitis is difficult to diagnose as the clinical presentation is often nonspecific and it depends on the site and timing of thrombus formation. Such rare complication has to be suspected if the patient presents late or when there were high fever and deranged liver function. Prompt appendectomy and antibiotics therapy remain the essential components of treatment for acute appendicitis. The need of additional anticoagulation therapy and its optimal duration for SMV thrombophlebitis remains unclear. Nevertheless, the use of anticoagulation therapy should be weighed against the risk of bleeding complication.

Polymeric clips are a quicker and cheaper alternative to endoscopic ligatures for securing the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Introduction The use of polymeric clips in securing the appendiceal stump has been increasingly reported as a viable alternative to current methods in emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy. We evaluated the operative outcomes following the use of polymeric clips versus endoscopic ligatures. The primary endpoint was operative time, with secondary outcomes including complications, inpatient stay, and cost analysis. Materials and methods Operative records were retrospectively analysed to identify patients undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy between January 2014 and June 2015. Data collected included age, gender, body mass index, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, antibiotic use, preoperative haematological and biochemical parameters, 30-day readmission rate and complications. Results A total of 125 patients were included within the study, with 78 within the endoloop group and 47 in the polymeric clip group. There were no differences in age, gender, body mass index, hospital stay, antibiotic use, 30-day readmission rates or postoperative complications. Operative time was significantly reduced in the polymeric clip group (59 vs. 68 minutes, P = 0.00751). The use of polymeric clips cost £21 compared with £49 for endoloops per operation, which rose to £70 if both clips and endoloops were used during the procedure. Discussion Polymeric clips are a safe, viable and economical method for securing the appendiceal stump during laparoscopic appendicectomy. The clinical significance of nine minutes of reduced operating time in the polymeric clip cohort warrants further study with an adequately powered randomised controlled trial.

Irrigation Versus Suction Alone in Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

To investigate outcomes of peritoneal irrigation versus suction without irrigation in patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomy. We performed a systematic review and conducted a search of electronic information sources to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating outcomes of irrigation versus suction alone in patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomy. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the risk of bias of RCTs and observational studies, respectively. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. We identified 3 RCTs and 2 retrospective observational studies, enrolling 2511 patients. Our results suggested that there was no difference between peritoneal irrigation and suction alone in terms of intraabdominal abscess rate (odds ratio = 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49-11.74, P = .28), wound infection (risk difference = 0.00, 95% CI = -0.04 to 0.05, P = .85), and length of stay (mean difference = -1.02, 95% CI = -3.10 to 1.07, P = .34); however, peritoneal irrigation was associated with longer operative time (mean difference = 7.12, 95% CI = 4.33 to 9.92, P < .00001). Our results remained consistent when randomized trials, adult patients, and pediatric patients were analyzed separately. The best available evidence suggests that the peritoneal irrigation with normal saline during laparoscopic appendectomy does not provide additional benefits compared with suction alone in terms of intraabdominal abscess, wound infection, and length of stay but it may prolong the operative time. The quality of the best available evidence is moderate; therefore, high-quality RCTs, which are adequately powered, are required to provide more robust basis for definite conclusions.

Post-operative telephone review is safe and effective: prospective study - Monash outpatient review by phone trial.

Studies have shown that post-operative telephone follow-up is satisfactory and effective. As high quality evidence is scant, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare it against outpatient clinic review for emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy or cholecystectomy. Patients who received emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy or cholecystectomy were eligible for this study. Once recruited, they were randomly allocated to either clinic review or telephone follow-up on discharge. Participants were reviewed at 2 weeks after operation and contacted again at 4 weeks after initial follow-up for satisfaction survey. One hundred and seventy-nine participants were recruited with one withdrawn consent and six excluded. Ninety-six underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy and 76 had laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ninety-six attended clinic review and 76 had telephone follow-up. The two groups were similar in baseline variables. Non-attendance rate was higher for clinic review cohort (24% vs 6.6%, P = 0.002). Participants who received telephone review reported higher satisfaction level (9.31 vs 8.85, P = 0.002), and most patients prefer telephone follow-up (73.1%, P < 0.0001). No difference was detected for missed complications (P = 0.354). Telephone follow-up post laparoscopic appendicectomy or cholecystectomy is safe, satisfying and effective.

Efficacy of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy in treating complicated appendicitis for elderly patients.

Objective:To assess the therapeutic effects of emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in treating complicated appendicitis (CA) for elderly patients (defined as age >65 years).Methods:We conducted a retrospective study of 115 elderly patients with CA who underwent surgical therapy in the Affiliated Huizhou Hospital of Sun Yat-Sun University, Huizhou, Guangdong Province, China between September 2014 and August 2016. Of these, 59 patients consented to open appendectomy (OA), and LA was performed in the other 56 patients. The perioperative and follow-up variables of the 2 groups were analyzed.Results:The operative time in the LA group was longer than the OA group (LA: 70.5±16.0 min versus [vs.] OA: 59.3±12.0 min, p<0.001). The LA group had lower chances of incision infections (LA: 8.9% vs. OA: 28.8 %, p=0.007) and shorter hospital stay (LA: 6.1± 2.5 days vs. OA: 9.6±3.5 days, p<0.001). Return to soft diet (LA: 1.4 ± 0.8 days vs. OA: 3.0 ± 1.6 days, p<0.001) and time to out of bed (LA: 1.3±0.5 days vs. OA: 2.5±0.9 days, p<0.001) was faster in the LA group. The incidence of complications and 30-day readmission rate in the LA group was much lower than the OA group.Conclusion:Emergency LA in treating elderly patients with CA has the advantages of less trauma, definite curative effect, low complication rates, and fast recovery when compared with OA.

Improving operating room and surgical instrumentation efficiency, safety, and communication via the implementation of emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendectomy conversion case carts

In the perioperative environment, communication, safety, and efficiency are paramount to ensure the effective delivery of patient care. Often overlooked, however, is the role that surgical instrumentation plays in these aspects of perioperative care. Through an analysis of the sterile processing environment at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), we identified a large amount of instrumentation being cycled unnecessarily throughout the system. This pattern was particularly notable for laparotomic equipment that is sent to almost all laparoscopic cases so that it is available in the event of conversion to laparotomy. Prompted by this analysis along with the high case volume and low conversion rate of laparoscopic cholecystectomies and appendectomies, we redesigned the laparotomic instrument supply chain for these procedures by placing all laparotomic conversion instruments on dedicated emergency case carts. In one month following implementation we avoided cycling nearly 15,000 pounds of unused instrumentation through the perioperative environment and have increased staff safety and communication among perioperative leadership. Objectiveto reduce the amount of unnecessary surgical instrumentation that is cycled through the perioperative environment.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy.

Acute appendicitis (AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Non-operative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient’s factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon’s skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner (i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.