Single Incision Versus Standard 3-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Peter, Shawn D. St.; Adibe, Obinna O.; Juang, David; Sharp, Susan W.; Garey, Carissa L.; Laituri, Carrie A.; Murphy, John P.; Andrews, Walter S.; Sharp, Ronald J.; Snyder, Charles L.; Holcomb, George; Ostlie, Daniel J.

doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31823003b5

Cited by 214 publications

(153 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

143

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the remaining variables were comparable in both groups which was similar to our study. 11 Kang et al in another study concluded that other than a marginal increase in operative time in SILA (0.276) all the other variables were quite comparable. 12 The glove port technique although cost effective could considerably increase operative time as it has a steep learning curve, and surgeons require high technical skills to perform it.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Single incision laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy- a prospective study

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The advent of Single incision laparoscopic appendicectomy (SILA) has encouraged surgeons to compare its benefits over conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy (CLA). We conducted a prospective study comparing SILA with CLA, evaluating parameters like operative time and complications, post-operative pain, duration of stay and the cosmetic outcome.Methods: A prospective, comparative study of 94 consecutive patients was conducted at our institution between December 2014 and May 2016. The data regarding the various parameters were documented in both groups of patients.Results: Among the 94 patients, 30 underwent SILA and 64 underwent CLA. We found statistically significant outcomes for SILA over CLA in variables such as operative time (p=0.0018), duration of hospital stay (p≤0.0001) and cosmetic outcome (p≤0.0001). Almost all patients in the SILA category showed no evidence of a scar after a three month follow up.Conclusions: SILA was found to have a better outcome than CLA with regard to operative time, hospital stay and cosmesis. We conclude that this technique of SILA can be a better alternative to CLA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Single incision laparoscopic appendicectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy- a prospective study

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other complications such as postoperative ileus or surgical wound infection, among others, showed no significant differences. Peters et al [37] stated that there was no significant difference in wound infection between the SPILA group (6/180) and the three-port group (3/180). A single patient suffered an intra-abdominal abscess, occurring in the three-port group.…”

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Single Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy Replace the Traditional Three Port Laparoscopic Approach in Coming Future: A Review

Chand¹,

Ling²

2015

Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Journal of Surgery[ IntroductionMedicine is an ever-changing and ever-growing field where day after day and year after year new things are invented, applied for the treatment of various diseases. In the line of treatment, surgery has been one of the feared treatment options for most of the patients; therefore surgeons try to provide the patients with the best possible surgical treatment options. The best possible surgical option has always been the one with the lesser complications intra and postoperatively, wellcontrolled pain, less stay at hospital etc. Both doctors and patient don't want to maximize hospital stay as one study stated that extended hospital stay has been associated with increased incidence of hospital acquired infections, which causes further increase in morbidity and mortality [1]. One of the greatest achievements in the history of surgery has been evolved from open surgical techniques to the operative video-laparoscopy Acute appendicitis is one of the most common cause of acute abdomen and one of the most common surgical emergencies. Appendectomy for acute appendicitis is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures [2]. The surgical technique of first open appendectomy (OA) was performed by Dr. Charles Mcburney in and this approach has not significantly changed in the last 1 century [3]. In 1983, Dr. Kurt Semm, performed first minimally invasive laparoscopic appendectomy, thereafter LA has become the standard of practice in uncomplicated appendectomies in most minimally invasive institution [4]. In the past few years of minimally invasive surgery, LESS, NOTES has gained popularity. SILA was first described in 1998 by Esposito and has gained popularity as a method with a concept of ''scarless'' abdomen [5]. While Pelosi in 1992 performed the first SILA for acute appendicitis [6]. Innovative methods such as NOTES (Natural Orifice Tran luminal Endoscopic Surgery) and single incision laparoscopy (SIL) have demonstrated promissory results in various surgical procedures, appendectomy among them [7]. According to a recent study, SILA resulted in faster recovery than conventional 3-port LA [8]. However in some other studies it has also been reported that SILS is associated with a longer operative time and higher postoperative pain scores, and that patients need more analgesics to feel comfortable [9]. NOTES, SILS, and robotic surgery do not constitute techniques, rather they are concepts, hence regarded as transitions from laparoscopic surgery to unknown fields of minimally invasive therapeutic modalities [10]. SILS was recommended as a possible alternative of the traditional laparoscopic surgery via four ports for the biliary tact by Navarra et al. [11]. With NOTES having a diminished success, because of the inability to find a clean site for access, thereby increasing the chances of intra-abdominal spillage or infection from the incision [12] increased interest has been seen in SILS. SILS occupies a space between NOTES and standard laparoscopy [13]. There have been several studies regard...

show abstract

“…A very low mortality rate shown by previous studies of 0.05% and 0.3% for laparoscopic and conventional open appendectomy respectively indicate safety of both procedures especially in absence of complicated disease. 18 In our studies overall postoperative complication was 24.5% for open and 6.7%for laparoscopic procedure with most common reported complication of wound dehiscence and wound infection especially in patients who underwent open appendectomy. Wound infection was more commonly observed in patients who had complicated appendicitis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%