Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy: Prospective Randomized Trial

Hansen, John Brendan; Smithers, B. M.; Wall, Daryl R.; Miller, Brian J.

doi:10.1007/s002689900003

Cited by 223 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is parallel with the results shown by other research worker in most of the studies. 6,11,12,[17][18][19][20] An overall look at the various studies done so far, and in confirmation with our results, it is clearly appreciated that the more severe the appendicitis, the less often laparoscopic appendectomy is of benefit. Another important point noted here, that in so many cases, surgical treatment is not necessary and may subside with antibiotics.…”

Section: Figure 1: Hospital Staysupporting

confidence: 59%

Comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

Kumar¹,

Aggarwal²

2018

Int J Res Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy has now considered the gold standard for the management of gall stone disease, laparoscopic appendectomy has not attained the same degree of popularity and acceptance. Aim of this study is to assess and compare the role of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy in acute appendicitis as well as in the patients planned for interval appendectomy.Methods: Total number of fifty cases over the age of 12 years were studied prospectively. Out of 50 number of total cases, 20 cases were those who have been operated laparoscopically while 30 cases were of open appendectomy group. The two groups were compared with respect to operative time, length of hospital stay, post-operative pain and nausea, complication rate and time to return to normal activity.Results: The mean age was 22.8±2(6.83) and 26.7±2(9.22) years in the laparoscopic and open groups respectively, with the range of 14 to 42 in the laparoscopic group and 13 to 50 years in the open group. The Average operating time was more in the laparoscopic appendectomy as compared to the time taken in performing open appendectomy. However, this was not statistically significant with p<0,05. Overall, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between open and laparoscopic groups.Conclusions: The laparoscopic appendectomy is safe, simple and efficient technique for treatment of acute appendicitis with result comparable to the open appendectomy, if not better.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1: Hospital Staysupporting

confidence: 59%

Comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

Kumar¹,

Aggarwal²

2018

Int J Res Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials has been reported with outcomes of 2877 patients included in 28 trials. Overall complication rates were comparable, but wound infections were definitely reduced after laparoscopy (2.3% to 6.1%) [17]. Rohr et al reported higher wound infection rates after laparoscopic appendectomy, but most of the literature supports the view that wound infection is less common after a laparoscopic procedure.…”

Section: Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Wound Infectionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy for the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Mishra¹,

Hanna²,

Cuschieri³

2008

WJOLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract::Open appendectomy is the 'gold standard' for the treatment of acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy though widely practiced has not gained universal approval. Although it is a generally safe operation, postoperative complications occur in few patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy was first described in 1983. Reports of early studies were equivocal with few studies evaluating analgesic requirements and the length of hospital stay. This study was aimed to compare laparoscopic with open appendectomy and ascertain the therapeutic benefit, if any, in the overall management of acute appendicitis. Key words:Laparoscopic appendectomy, Appendectomy, Appendicitis, Laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy Introduction:

show abstract

“…In a randomized meta-analysis including 2877 patients, wound infection was significantly less in the LA group (15). On the other hand, Rohr et al (16) reported more frequent wound infections in the LA group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Should appendectomy be performed laparoscopically? Clinical prospective randomized trial

Mantoğlu¹,

Karıp²,

Mestan³

et al. 2015

UCD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been described in 1983, and its superiority over open appendectomy (OA) is still being debated. Currently, there is no agreement on the advantages of LA. Postoperative pain is reported to be lower along with a faster return to normal activities in LA. However, some studies do not support these findings. In our study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and cost effectiveness of LA and OA. Material and Methods:Patients were prospectively randomized into LA (31 patients) and OA (32 patients) groups. Demographic data, pre-and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, duration of surgery and hospitalization, complications, and pain scores (VAS) were recorded. Cost was calculated for both groups. Return to normal activities was evaluated by phone calls at the first and second week and 1 month after surgery.Results: There was a significant postoperative decrease in WBC count in the LA group (p<0.01). There were no differences between LA and OA groups in terms of postoperative CRP levels (p>0.05). The rates of wound infection and abscess were similar (p>0.05), while post-operative pain and time to return to normal activities were higher in the OA group (p<0.01). There was a positive correlation between BMI and operative time in the LA group (p<0.01), while BMI and operative time did not show a correlation in the OA group (p>0,05). The average cost in the LA and OA groups were 1960.5±339.05 and 687.115±159.5 TL, respectively. Conclusion:LA is an effective method in the treatment of acute appendicitis due to less pain and faster recovery. LA can be the choice of treatment in acute appendicitis, with utilization of re-useable and cheaper vascular sealing devices.

show abstract

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy: Prospective Randomized Trial

Cited by 223 publications

References 8 publications

Comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

Comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy for the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Should appendectomy be performed laparoscopically? Clinical prospective randomized trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About