Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “APPENDECTOMY”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Effect of ultrasonography and optional computed tomography on the outcome of appendectomy.

The aim of this study was to investigate the value of US and complementary CT in patients with suspected appendicitis, and to detect adverse outcomes of preoperative imaging. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 233 consecutive patients who underwent an appendectomy as an emergency procedure in our hospital, within a 2-year period. Our hospital policy is to perform diagnostic imaging in all patients with clinical suspicion of appendicitis. The US was performed in 227 patients, followed by additional unenhanced helical focused appendiceal CT in 30 patients with equivocal US results. We evaluated the negative appendectomy rate, occurrence of perforation, and our in-hospital delay. Acute appendicitis was pathologically proven in 219 patients, corresponding to a negative appendectomy rate of 6%. The US with optional CT diagnosed appendicitis with a sensitivity of 96.7%. Forty-eight appendices (21.9%) were perforated. The median overall in-hospital delay was 5 h (range 0.5-123.5 h). For the perforated appendices this was 4.5 h (range 0.5-64.5 h), for the non-perforated appendices 6.0 h (range 0.5-123.5 h). In patients with suspected acute appendicitis, US examination with the option of additional CT significantly lowers the negative appendectomy rate as compared with the clinical acumen alone, without adverse effects on the perforation rate or the in-hospital delay.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Laparoscopic vs conventional appendectomy--a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

AIM: To compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic and conventional "open" appendectomy in the treatment of acute appendicitis. METHODS: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials available by May 1998 that compared both techniques. Within each trial and for each outcome an effect size was calculated; the effect sizes were then pooled by a random-effects model. RESULTS: We summarised outcome data of 2877 patients included in 28 trials. Operating time was +16 min (95% confidence interval +12-20 min) longer for laparoscopic appendectomy. Overall complication rates were comparable, but wound infections were definitely reduced after laparoscopy [rate difference -4.2%, (-2.3% to -6.1%)]. Intra-abdominal abscesses, however, occurred slightly more frequently [+0.9%, (-0.4% to +2.3%)]. Hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy was 15 h (8-23 h) shorter, and patients returned to full fitness or work 7 days (5-9 days) earlier. Pain intensity on day 1 was slightly less. Heterogeneity was present for some outcome measures due to methodological differences among the primary studies. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy reduces wound infections and eases postoperative recovery. Nevertheless, the various differences among the primary studies and their partly flawed methodology make it difficult to generalise from these findings.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2002

One-trocar appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a feasible and a safe alternative to open appendectomy. Several laparoscopic procedures have been described that use one or more trocars. We report our experience with the treatment of acute appendicitis using a laparoscopy-assisted technique by means of only one transumbilical trocar. METHODS: From February 1996 to February 1999 we performed 65 laparoscopic appendectomies. In the procedures, a 10-mm operative telescope was used, with a 450-mm atraumatic grasper introduced through the operative channel. After the intraabdominal laparoscopic dissection, the appendix was exteriorized through the umbilical trocar. The appendectomy was performed outside the abdomen as in the open procedure. The procedure was completed using only one trocar in 55 patients (84.6%). Regarding the other 10 cases (15.3%), in 5 we used more than one trocar and in 5 conversion to open surgery was needed. RESULTS: The average operating time in our series was 25 min and the median time to discharge was 2 days. There were six (11%) postoperative complications (three serous umbilical secretion and three umbilical hematomas). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that this technique, which combines the advantages of both the open and the laparoscopic procedures, is a valid alternative for the treatment of acute appendicitis. However, this procedure cannot always be completed using only one trocar, as happened in 10 cases in our series.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

The effect of intraoperative bupivacaine administration on parenteral narcotic use after laparoscopic appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect that prophylactic administration of local anesthesia into surgical incisions has on pain and analgesic use after laparoscopic appendectomy. We examined how preemptive infiltration of a local anesthetic affected the use of parenteral narcotics after laparoscopic appendectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 60 patients who underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy from January 2000 to April 2001 at our institution. We studied the association between prophylactic bupivacaine analgesia and patterns of postoperative parenteral narcotic use. RESULTS: Of 46 patients who received intraoperative bupivacaine, 24 (52%) required postoperative parenteral narcotics as compared with 12 (86%) of 14 patients who did not receive bupivacaine (risk difference, 34%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10-51%; p = 0.02). After adjustment for other factors, the patients who received prophylactic bupivacaine were much less likely to receive parenteral narcotics during their postoperative hospital stay than the patients who did not receive prophylactic bupivacaine (odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.9; p = 0.03). Furthermore, the patients who received prophylactic bupivacaine required fewer doses (median number of doses, 0.5; interquartile range [IQR], 0-2) of parenteral narcotics postoperatively than those who did not receive bupivacaine (median, 2; IQR, 1-4; p value for comparison, 0.03). CONCLUSION: Intraoperative bupivacaine infiltrated locally into surgical wounds is associated with both a decreased need for postoperative parenteral narcotics and a reduced number of doses in patients who have undergone a laparoscopic appendectomy.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of laparoscopy in the treatment of pediatric acute appendicitis continues to be controversial, particularly as it relates to operative time and costs. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 200 children who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis concurrently over 35 months at a large teaching children's hospital. RESULTS: Laparoscopic ( n = 105) [corrected] and open ( n = 95) appendectomies were performed. The operative times and postoperative lengths of hospital stay were similar for the two groups. The mean total hospital cost for the laparoscopic group (5,572 dollars) was significantly higher than for the open group (4,472 dollars); ( p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Notably, the results show similar operative times for laparoscopic and open appendectomy. The cost of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis is higher than for the open procedure. This study challenges health care providers to reduce costs and develop new ways to measure beneficial outcomes in a pediatric population that may reveal laparoscopic benefits.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2003

Intraabdominal abscess following open and laparoscopic appendectomy in the pediatric population.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing intraabdominal abscess (IAA) rates following laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) have shown conflicting results. METHODS: The charts of 324 children undergoing appendectomy were reviewed retrospectively to examine the incidence of IAA. RESULTS: Of the 324 appendectomies, 204 (63.0%) were completed laparoscopically and 119 (36.7%) were performed open. The conversion rate was 0.2% (1/324). Of the 15 (4.6%) IAAs, 7 occurred in the LA group (3.4%) and 8 occurred in the OA group (6.7%) [p = not significant (NS)]. The incidence of IAA for perforated appendicitis for LA was 15% (7/46) and that for OA was 10% (7/70) (p = NS). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates no statistically significant difference in the rate of IAA among children following LA and OA. LA can be performed for perforated appendicitis without increasing the risk of IAA.

Abdominal Abscess↗
PubMed2004

Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: an evaluation of postoperative factors.

BACKGROUND: The use of laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial. Outcomes were compared between patients who had complicated appendicitis and those who had uncomplicated appendicitis. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 304) who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were studied. Patients undergoing open appendectomies also were compared ad hoc. Analgesia use, length of hospital stay, return to activity, and complication rates for the complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis subgroups were analyzed. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 243 patients (80%). There were no statistical differences in characteristics between the two groups. The operating times, lengths of hospital stay, return to activity times, complication rates, and analgesia requirements, both in the hospital and after discharge, were equivalent. A greater number of complicated cases required open conversion. Considering those with complicated appendicitis, the open group had a significantly longer mean hospital stay and a higher complication rate than those treated with laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The minimally invasive laparoscopic technique is safe and efficacious. It should be the initial procedure of choice for most cases of complicated appendicitis.

Abdominal Abscess↗
PubMed2004

Appendix tumors in the era of laparoscopic appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: The safety of laparoscopic appendectomy for the management of incidentally discovered appendiceal tumors has not yet been established. METHODS: Appendiceal tumor cases managed by laparoscopy or laparotomy over a 10-year period were reviewed. RESULTS: The pathological diagnoses were 23 carcinoid and 20 cancerous lesions. The median patient ages were 36 and 69 years, respectively, for carcinoid and other tumors (p < 0.05). Acute appendicitis was present in 70% of carcinoid cases and 35% of other tumors (p < 0.05). Eight patients with carcinoid tumors were operated on by laparoscopy, whereas 15 underwent laparotomy. Laparoscopic and open procedures were performed in three and 17 patients with cancerous lesions, respectively. Invaded surgical margins were seen after laparoscopy in 20% of patients and open surgery in 6%. Synchronous colon carcinoma was detected in 14% of the patients with an appendix neoplasm. The 5-year survival rates were similar after both laparoscopic and open appendectomy for either carcinoid or other tumors. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy for appendiceal tumors seems to have a slightly higher rate of inadequate resection. However, it is not associated with a significantly worse patient prognosis than open appendectomy.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2005

Is laparoscopic appendectomy in children associated with an uncommon postoperative complication?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is controversial due to the high rate of intraabdominal abscess (IAA). We report a postlaparoscopic appendectomy complication (PLAC) observed in pediatric patients discharged after an uneventful postoperative period. METHODS: In this case series, a review of the medical records of children who underwent LA or open appendectomy (OA) during a 5-year period was performed. The diagnosis of PLAC was based on three well-defined criteria: time of appearance, clinical and laboratory findings, and ultrasonographic characteristic features. RESULTS: A total of 374 patients underwent appendectomy (LA, 129 patients; OA, 245 patients). One patient with conversion of LA to OA and 35 patients with gangrenous or perforated appendicitis (seven from the LA group and 28 from the OA group) were excluded from the study. After LA, nine children developed intraabdominal complications during their hospitalization (six infiltrate in the right lower quadrant and three IAA); these were also excluded. Discharge from the department was done when three conditions were fulfilled: normal body temperature, normal leukocyte count, and passage of a stool. Among the 112 LA patients, PLAC was observed in 15 (13.4%), aged 12.5 +/- 2.9 years, who were discharged after LA in 2.7 +/- 0.9 days. Number of PLAC and time of its appearance were not significantly different in patients with normal or pathological appendix. Sonographic findings of PLAC at admission were fluid alone (n = 11), edematous mesenteric fat (n = 7), thickening of bowel wall (n = 9), and more than one sign (n = 9). At repeated sonography, these signs were present in all patients, and IAA developed in one of them. All children were successfully treated with antibiotics for 10.1 +/- 3.9 days, one of whom underwent a CT-guided percutaneous drainage for IAA. CONCLUSIONS: PLAC may be the result of a slow development of local interstitial infection in the ileocecal area due to mesothelial damage caused by CO2 pneumoperitoneum and local thermal effect produced by energized systems. This may explain its delayed appearance and the efficacy of the antibiotic treatment.

Abdomen↗
PubMed2001

Is laparoscopic appendectomy safe in pregnant women?

BACKGROUND: Because of limited laboratory and clinical data, no accepted guidelines concerning the safety of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in pregnancy have been established yet. In this prospective study, we evaluated the safety and outcome of LA in pregnant women as compared with the same control group of pregnant women who underwent open appendectomy (OA) during the same period. METHODS: During the years 1996 to 1999, 11 consecutive pregnant women (mean age, 27 years; range 21-39 years; gestation age range, 7-34 weeks) who underwent LA were prospectively evaluated and compared with a matched group of 11 women (mean age, 30 years; range 18-42 years; gestation age range, 11-37 weeks) who underwent OA. The following parameters were analyzed: obstetric and gynecologic risk factors, length of procedure, perioperative complications, length of stay, and outcome of pregnancy. Both groups were well matched in age and risk factors for pregnancy loss. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the length of procedure (60 vs. 46 min) and the complications rate (one in each group) between the LA and OA groups, respectively. There was no conversion in the LA group. The length of postoperative stay was shorter in the LA group (3.6 vs 5.2 days; p = 0.05). There was no fetal loss or other adverse outcome of pregnancy in either group, and all the women in both groups had normal full-term delivery. The infants' development was normal in both groups for a mean follow-up period of 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: According to this relatively small-scale study laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnant women may be as safe as open appendectomy. This procedure is technically feasible in all trimesters of pregnancy and associated with the same known benefits of laparoscopic surgery that nonpregnant patients experience.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1984

Negative findings at appendectomy.

A prospective study was conducted on 107 patients with negative findings at appendectomy. The operation was unnecessary in 94 of the patients. A cause for the symptoms could be found in 43 patients, 32 during operation and 11 later by investigation or by a second operation. Diagnosis remained unclear in 64 patients. There are many diseases that mimic acute appendicitis, and based on the disease entities encountered in this series, the surgeon must examine the abdominal organs carefully if the appendix is normal. The financial loss of negative appendectomy was substantial in our study, and the total early and late complication rate was 14 percent. Patients with negative appendectomy should be regularly followed up to 1 year, since 9.3 percent of patients had a diagnosis made later by investigation, and 12.1 percent had moderate to severe pain on follow-up. Possible means to cut down the negative appendectomy rate without increasing the perforation rate have been suggested herein for further evaluation.

Abdomen, Acute↗
PubMed1994

Laparoscopic appendectomy in children: report of 1,379 cases.

The authors present a retrospective analysis of 1,379 pediatric laparoscopic appendectomies. The patients' average age was 10 years (range, 2 to 16 years). On gross examination, 90% of the appendixes appeared inflamed; on microscopic examination, 93% had evidence of acute appendicitis. The incidence of appendiceal peritonitis was 16%. Nonappendiceal lesions were identified in 10% of patients. The incidence of minor intraoperative events was 2.1%, and the postoperative complication rate was 1.5%; 0.7% of patients required a subsequent laparotomy or additional laparoscopic procedure. There were no deaths. The children were discharged after a 2-day (average) hospitalization and returned to unrestricted activities 1 week after surgery. The advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy are its easy and rapid localization of the appendix, the ability to explore the entire abdominal cavity, the ability to lavage completely the contaminated peritoneal cavity, and a reduction in the incidence of intraperitoneal abscesses and postoperative adhesions. Laparoscopic appendectomy offers reduced parietal scarring, a shorter hospital stay, and an earlier return to normal activities, even in cases of complicated acute appendicitis. Our experience confirms that laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and effective in children.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

CT scans may not reduce the negative appendectomy rate in children.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Concern about an increased lifetime risk of cancer in children who have undergone a single computed tomography (CT) scan prompted us to review utilization of this diagnostic test in our appendicitis population. METHODS: From 1998 to 2001, the records of 720 children admitted to our hospital with a diagnosis of appendicitis were reviewed for adjunct diagnostic modalities, including ultrasonography (USG) and CT scanning. Negative appendectomy rates were determined by the final pathologic report. Statistical comparisons were made using the chi(2) test, and significance was assigned at P <.05. RESULTS: The use of ultrasound scan for diagnosing appendicitis decreased from 20.0% in 1998 to 7.0% in 2001 (P <.01). Conversely, the use of CT scans increased from 17.6% in 1998 to 51.3% in 2001 (P <.001). During this time period the difference in the negative appendectomy rate was not statistically significant (P < 0.20). Of the negative appendectomies, 11 of these patients had a USG interpreted as positive for appendicitis (22.0%), and 9 had a CT scan interpreted as positive (18.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Liberal use of CT scans in diagnosing appendicitis in children has not resulted in a decreased negative appendectomy rate. Potentially harmful radiation exposure should prompt pediatric surgeons to reevaluate the role of CT scanning in the management of children with suspected appendicitis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Emergent vs urgent appendectomy in children: a study of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Emergent appendectomy (EA) in children is still considered surgical dogma and continues to be recommended as a standard of care. This study examined whether emergent operation has any outcome advantages over urgent operation. METHODS: The charts of children treated for appendicitis during a recent 28-month period at 2 children's hospitals, where appendectomies are not performed between midnight and 7 am, were reviewed. Outcomes were compared between patients who underwent EA (within 8 hours of presentation) vs those who underwent urgent appendectomy (UA, after 8 hours). RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-five children met the criteria for the study. One hundred sixty-one (44%) were in the EA group (5.3 +/- 2.1 hours), and 204 (56%) were in the UA group (16.8 +/- 9.7 hours). The incidence of gangrenous or perforated appendicitis was significantly higher in the EA group (47% vs 36%, P = .04). There were no significant differences between EA and UA in postoperative outcomes, including readmissions (3.7% vs 1.0%, P = .08), wound infections (0.6% vs 2.4%, P = .17), or postoperative abscesses (1.9% vs 1.5%, P = .77). There were no significant differences in average hospital stay or average hospital charges between EA and UA (3.2 days for both, 14,775 dollars vs 14,850 dollars), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Emergent appendectomy in children has no advantages over UA with respect to gangrene and perforation rates, readmissions, postoperative complications, hospital stay, or hospital charges. Performance of a UA at a time convenient to the surgeon should be considered within the standard of care.

Appendectomy↗
PubMed2007

Matched analysis of nonoperative management vs immediate appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: The role of nonoperative therapy vs immediate appendectomy in the management of children with perforated appendicitis remains undefined. The objective of this study was to rigorously compare these management options in groups of patients with matched clinical characteristics. METHODS: Multicenter case-control study was conducted from 1998 to 2003. We compared patients treated nonoperatively vs those undergoing appendectomy to identify differences in 12 clinical parameters. We then generated a second control group of patients matched for these variables and compared the following outcomes in these clinically similar groups: complication rate, abscess rate, and length of stay (LOS). Analysis was performed according to intention-to-treat principles, using chi2, Fisher exact, and Student t tests. RESULTS: The only significant difference between patients treated nonoperatively and those treated by appendectomy was the duration of pain on presentation (6.8 vs 3.1 days of pain). We created a second control group of patients undergoing immediate appendectomy matched on duration of pain on presentation to patients treated nonoperatively. These groups continued to be clinically comparable for the other 11 parameters. Compared to this matched control group, the nonoperative group had fewer complications (19% vs 43%, P < .01), fewer abscesses (4% vs 24%, P < .01), and a trend for shorter LOS (6.5 +/- 5.7 vs 8.8 +/- 6.7 days, P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: When nonoperative management for perforated appendicitis was studied using appropriately matched clinical controls, we found that it resulted in a lower complication rate and shorter LOS in the subset of patients presenting with a long duration of pain. Our data suggest that nonoperative management should be prospectively evaluated in children with perforated appendicitis presenting with a history of pain exceeding 5 days.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is commonly performed and has been presumed to offer economic benefits similar to those of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study was done to examine that premise. METHODS: Two surgical groups contributed consecutively operated patients with a clinical diagnosis of appendicitis. One group did all appendectomies open and the other group did them laparoscopically. Hospital expenses were compared using a single billing formula. Hospital length of stay, time to return to work, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Operating room times were longer for the laparoscopic group, median 80 minutes, versus median 50 minutes for the open group. Hospital length of stay and return to work were the same, median 1 day and median 10 days, respectively. Wound complications were less common in the laparoscopic group, 0 of 30, than in the open group, 3 of 18; however, there was 1 intra-abdominal abscess in the laparoscopic group. Median cost of the laparoscopic group was $2,915 versus $1,747 for the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy is more expensive than appendectomy but does not reduce hospital length of stay nor change the time to return to work; however, wound complications are less common.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed1999

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Despite many randomized controlled trials, the merits of laparoscopic appendectomy remain unclear. A meta-analysis may provide insights not evident from any individual studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic literature search yielded 17 trials (1,962 subjects) of true randomized design with usable statistical data comparing laparoscopic and conventional appendectomy in adults. The effect sizes for operating time, hospitalization, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, wound infection, and intra-abdominal abscess were calculated, using the random effects model to allow for heterogeneity. An estimate of the robustness of all positive findings was also calculated. RESULTS: Modest but statistically significant effect sizes were found for four of the six outcome measures. Laparoscopic appendectomy takes 31% longer to perform, but results in less postoperative pain, faster recovery (by 35%), and lower wound infection rates (by 60%). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy offers significant improvement in postoperative outcomes at the cost of a longer operation.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

Chronic right-lower-quadrant abdominal pain: is there a role for elective appendectomy?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Chronic right-lower-quadrant abdominal pain is a frequent problem in the pediatric population. The purpose of this report is to detail the outcome of management of these patients with appendectomy. METHODS: Appendiceal colic was judged to be present if the history showed cramping abdominal pain in association with McBurney's point tenderness. This is a retrospective review of 50 consecutive pediatric patients experiencing pain for greater than 1 year. All patients were evaluated at a single institution by one surgeon and underwent elective appendectomies from April 1985 through April 1997. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of the patients were girls. One hundred forty-nine imaging and endoscopic studies were performed with 135 negative findings. Twenty-three patients had a minimum of one previous emergency room visit or hospitalization for the same abdominal complaints. The pathological findings were distinctly different from those of incidental appendectomies. Three patients had undergone previous diagnostic explorations for abdominal pain, the appendix was not removed, and a subsequent appendectomy relieved the discomfort. Forty-nine of the 50 patients were pain free at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Appendiceal colic is a clinical diagnosis. It is anticipated that patients with cramping abdominal pain associated with McBurney's point tenderness could undergo less preoperative workup and expedited resolution of the problem in the future.

Abdominal Pain↗