Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is taken into account as a standard method of performing cholecystectomy and has substituted the old method throughout the world, while laparoscopic appendectomy still not attaining that reputation. In this paper, a retrospective study was done to compare between both laparoscopic and open appendectomy.Methods: Two hundred eighty-five patients were analyzed after appendectomy using either open or laparoscopic procedures. The data was compared over a period of 36 months. Surgical technique was the same among 6 surgeons, standard postoperative care for all patient groups. The outcome measures included comparing of mean operative time, days of hospitalization, postoperative pain and rate of wound infection.Results: Concerning open appendectomy the mean time was 28 minutes with 2 days of hospitalization. The postoperative pain extent was for 36 hours and rate of wound infection was 8/159. While in laparoscopic appendectomy the mean time was 55 minutes with one day hospitalization. The postoperative pain was for 12 hours and zero rate of wound infection.Conclusions: In general laparoscopy has plenty of gains over open surgery as discussed before but laparoscopic appendectomy is not easier, nor does it avoid general anesthesia. The cost for laparoscopic appendectomy is higher than for open appendectomy. The operative and post-operative complications are more critical (e.g.: intra-abdominal abscesses & perforation of bowel) as compared to open appendectomy. We have to assess the advantages and disadvantages, indications and contraindications when taking a decision for laparoscopic surgery. We suppose it would be very early to say that laparoscopic appendectomy is superior or can replace open appendectomy.

Introduction in patients with advanced primary or recurrent gynecologic, urologic, or rectal cancers without metastatic disease, extensive aggressive surgery such as pelvic exenteration may be necessary for curative intent treatment. This study aims to present the initial experience and clinical outcome of curative pelvic exenteration procedures for advanced or recurrent pelvic cancer in our center. Methods a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the colorectal unit at King Hussein Medical Center in Amman, Jordan, between March 2014 and December 2021. All patients who underwent pelvic exenteration procedures were included in this study. Demographic characteristics, type of procedure, completeness of excision, postoperative complications, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. Results a total of 30 patients underwent thirty-one operations. There were 22 females and eight males with a median age of 55 (range 25-86) years. Twenty-six surgeries were for advanced primary and 5 for recurrent malignancies. Twenty-nine operations were performed for colorectal and 2 for gynecological tumors. There were 19 posterior pelvic exenterations, 2 posterior pelvic exenterations with sacrectomy, and ten total pelvic exenterations. Completeness of tumor excision R0 was observed in 21 specimens, incomplete (R1/R2) in 6 specimens. The overall complication rate was 67.7% and 30-day mortality was 16.7%. Ten (33.3%) patients are disease free at a median follow-up of 22 months. Conclusion in our study, pelvic exenteration provides above 40% overall survival at a median follow-up of two years. Gaining experience in this type of procedure, a multidisciplinary approach, careful patients' selection, and preoperative counseling will reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality.

A 20 years old male patient presented to KHMC emergency room in the fifth of August 2015 with typical picture of acute appendicitis. Patient was admitted and decision for appendectomy was taken for the next two hours. Appendectomy done as usual through a small grid iron incision and a normally looking appendix removed which didn’t explain what happened with patient earlier, so we decided to look for other pathologies (like meckel’s diverticulum) and upon gently pulling out terminal ileum a second appendix shown in the field originated from ileocecal junction toward ileal mesenteric side 4 centimeter posterior to first appendix which was looking severely inflamed and was removed as usual.