Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Lee, Won Suk; Choi, Sang Tae; Lee, Jung Nam; Kim, Keon Kug; Park, Yeon Ho; Lee, Woon Kee; Baek, Jeong‐Heum; Lee, Tae‐Hoon

doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318273bde4

Cited by 100 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most researchers found that the cosmetic scores given by patients undergoing SILA was higher than that given by patients undergoing the 3PLA [17,18]. Conversely, according to study conducted by Lee et al [19], reported that the cosmetic satisfaction score and postoperative pain scores were not significantly different between SILA and 3-port LA. According to these studies, patients were more satisfied with the cosmetic appearance of SILA over 3PLA.…”

Section: Cosmeticmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…A single patient suffered an intra-abdominal abscess, occurring in the three-port group. According to the several studies conducted by Teoh et al, Frutos et al, Sozutek et al and Lee et al [14,16,19,21] showed patient complications were similar between groups the results for SILA and 3PLA groups revealed no significant difference despite some fewer complications in each groups.…”

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Section: Cosmeticmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 96%

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

show abstract

“…Twelve Potentially appropriate RCTs comparing SILA and CMLA were identified [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Among them, one study that applied a laparoscopic-assisted extracorporeal appendectomy technique was excluded [10].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single Incision versus Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Zhou

Jin²,

Zhang³

et al. 2014

Dig Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The efficacy of single incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) in comparison with conventional multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (CMLA) has not been conclusively determined. Methods: A systematic literature review (Medline, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) was performed. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SILA with CMLA were carried out by RevMan 5.0 software. Results: Eleven RCTs comparing SILA and CMLA were included. Overall, 1,216 patients were operated on: 611 cases by SILA versus 605 cases by CMLA. Compared with CMLA, SILA was associated with increased procedural difficulty, prolonged procedural duration, shorter length of hospital stay, earlier return to normal activity and better cosmesis. There were no significant differences in postoperative pain scores and complication rates between SILA and CMLA. Conclusion: The current best evidence shows SILA holds the promise of improving postoperative recovery and cosmetic result with equal efficacy and safety, whereas it is associated with higher surgical difficulty with longer surgical time when compared with CMLA.

show abstract

“…None have proven superior to the traditional three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy but do increase the technical complexity. [57][58][59][60][61] Historically, the…”

Section: Laparoscopic Appendicectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

A history of the treatment of appendicitis in children: lessons learned

Hamill

Hill

2016

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the latter half of the 19th century, surgeons increasingly reported performing appendicectomies. Fitz from Harvard, Groves from Canada and Tait from Britain all recorded successful removal of the appendix. McBurney described the point of maximal tenderness in classic appendicitis and also the muscle-splitting incision centred on this point. Priority is given to McArthur in describing the lateral muscle-splitting incision. The direction of the cutaneous incision was later modified by Elliott and Lanz. Incisions that healed well were essential to recovery. Appendicectomy became a 'fashionable' operation after the London surgeon, Treves, removed the appendix of King Edward VII. Through the 20th century, the mortality from appendicitis fell notably with the advent of sulphonamide and penicillin, improvements in fluid therapy and safer anaesthesia. By 1990, diagnostic delay was the main cause of death. Semm performed the first laparoscopic appendicectomy in 1990, roundly criticized at the time for what is now a routine procedure. We view contemporary debates on the indications for appendicectomy, the best approach and how to optimize recovery in the light of the history of this intriguing disease.

show abstract

Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Abstract: SPLA failed to show any advantages over CLA relative to pain and cosmesis. However, SPLA is as safe as CLA (RCT number 01348464).

Cited by 100 publications

References 26 publications

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

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

Single Incision versus Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

A history of the treatment of appendicitis in children: lessons learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About