2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.03.037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Complicated appendicitis in children: is laparoscopic appendectomy appropriate? A comparative study with the open appendectomy—our experience

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
39
2
9

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
39
2
9
Order By: Relevance
“…Many previous reports comparing LA and OA did not analyze readmission rates [9][10][11]. The hospital stay of LA was 5 days in our study and less than 7 days in most other studies [10][11][12]. Taking account of the fact that IAA usually develops 7 to 10 days after surgery, late development of IAA can be missed if readmission is not analyzed during the data review period, especially in a retrospective study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Many previous reports comparing LA and OA did not analyze readmission rates [9][10][11]. The hospital stay of LA was 5 days in our study and less than 7 days in most other studies [10][11][12]. Taking account of the fact that IAA usually develops 7 to 10 days after surgery, late development of IAA can be missed if readmission is not analyzed during the data review period, especially in a retrospective study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 52%
“…Some authors suggested copious irrigation of four quadrants and interloop areas with at least 3 L of sterile saline, leaving 300 to 500 mL of saline inside the peritoneal cavity at the end of the procedure, and also the application of a drain [14]. On the other hand, Wang et al [10] has recommended irrigation using copious amounts of fluid containing metronidazole. However, recent studies compared irrigation versus suction alone in perforated appendicitis in children suggested that irrigation of peritoneal cavity has no advantage [15,16].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For LA the operative time was significantly more compared to OA. 7 The patients in LA group had shorter stay in the hospital, started feeding earlier as well as the incidence of wound infection was lower when they compared to the patients in the OA group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Wenn man die Gradierung der Komplikationen nach Clavien durchführt, dann kommt es nach einer Cochrane-Analyse aus dem Jahr 2004 bei den Patienten in der laparoskopischen Gruppe allerdings zu einer erhöhten Inzidenz intraabdomineller Abszesse (Komplikation Level 3 - Reintervention oder Reoperation) gegenüber einer erhöhten Rate an Level-1-Komplikationen in der offenen Gruppe (vor allem Wundinfekte) [21]. Frühere Berichte [22] über eine erhöhte intraabdominelle Abszessrate bei Patienten mit perforierter Appendizitis konnten jedoch in neueren prospektiv randomisierten Studien, in denen sich im Gegenteil eine reduzierte Abszessrate bei erwachsenen und pädiatrischen Patienten in der laparoskopischen Gruppe zeigte, nicht mehr nachvollzogen werden [23,24]. Im Fall einer perforierten laparoskopischen Appendizitis reduziert eine intraabdominelle Spülung nach derzeitiger Datenlage nicht die Inzidenz postoperativer Abszesse [25], wobei die derzeitige Evidenzlage hier bisher keine eindeutige Empfehlung erlaubt.…”
Section: Spezielles Vorgehen Bei Bestimmten Krankheitsbildernunclassified