Laparoscopic Interval Appendectomy Versus Open Interval Appendectomy

Rashid, Arshad; Nazir, Saima; Kakroo, Showkat Majeed; Chalkoo, Manzoor Ahamad; Razvi, Syed; Wani, Ajaz Ahmad

doi:10.1097/sle.0b013e318277df6a

Cited by 35 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…de la apendicectomía abierta en comparación con la laparoscópica (15,1 % Vs. 3,7 %,respectivamente), además de tener una tendencia a mayor estancia hospitalaria y reintervención. Los pacientes de apendicectomía abierta tuvieron mayor infección en la incisión del sitio operatorio (8,7 % Vs. 2,8 %;p=0,01).…”

Section: Resultados Se Incluyeron 600 Pacientes: 389 Apendicectomíasunclassified

“…No se presentaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas con respecto a la estancia hospitalaria, pero hubo una tendencia a ser mayor con la técnica abierta. No se exploraron variables como el dolor posoperatorio, el tiempo de tolerancia a la vía oral, el tiempo de regreso a las actividades cotidianas y el resultado cosmético de la intervención; sin embargo, en la literatura se menciona también la superioridad de la técnica laparoscópica en todos estos aspectos 7,10,13,15 . Con respecto 16 .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Superioridad clínica de la apendicectomía laparoscópica sobre la técnica abierta: ¿adopción lenta de un nuevo estándar de tratamiento?

Toro

Barrera²,

Morales

2017

rev. colomb. cir.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultados Se Incluyeron 600 Pacientes: 389 Apendicectomíasunclassified

Section: Discussionunclassified

Superioridad clínica de la apendicectomía laparoscópica sobre la técnica abierta: ¿adopción lenta de un nuevo estándar de tratamiento?

Toro

Barrera²,

Morales

2017

rev. colomb. cir.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Unlike in conventional surgery for SSI, we were able to completely remove the necrotic tissue and infected suture in visualization under the endoscopy procedure. For small sinuses that could not be reached by endoscopy, the necrosis was removed by biopsy clip (16,17). The results demonstrated that endoscopy decreased the wound healing time, the rate of skin transplantation, the blood loss and the length of hospital stay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopy for treatment of surgical site infection: A randomized control trial

Wang

Dou

et al. 2014

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this randomized control study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopy for the treatment of surgical site infection (SSI), compared with conventional therapy. One hundred and six patients who were diagnosed with severe SSI were included in the study, performed from May 2005 to July 2012 at Tianjin Binhai New Area Dagang Hospital, China. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: 57 patients in group A treated by endoscopy and 49 patients in group B treated by conventional therapy for SSI. The primary outcome was the healing period of the wound; the secondary outcomes were the blood loss following surgery, visual analog scale (VAS) measurement, volume of irrigation saline during surgery, rate of skin transplantation, length of hospital stay and other complications. The mean wound healing time was significantly less in group A (10.0±2.5 days) than in group B (19.4±5.2 days). The mean VAS score 7 days after surgery in group A was significantly less compared with group B. The intra-operative blood loss, intra-operative volume of irrigation saline and length of the hospital stay were significantly reduced in group A compared with group B. No significant differences between the groups were revealed in terms of the duration of surgery and the clinical complications. This study demonstrated that the endoscopy procedure for the treatment of SSI reduces the wound healing time compared with that of traditional surgery, without increasing any risk of clinical events. The present study showed that endoscopy was not only effective but also safe in the therapy of serious SSI. However, a further randomized control trial is necessary to testify our conclusions.

show abstract

“…In this study, there was no statistical difference between both groups. In many studies, LA has been attributed with a relatively low incidence of complications compared with OA 20, 21 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Laparoscopic versus Open Appendicectomy

Hossain¹,

Jahan²,

Rahman³

et al. 2015

J. Armed Forces Med. Coll.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The advent of laparoscopic surgery has dramatically changed the field of surgery. With improvements in the equipment and increasing clinical experience it is now possible to perform almost any kind of procedure under laparoscopic visualization. The idea of minimal surgical trauma, resulting in significantly shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain, faster return to daily activities, and better cosmetic outcome have made laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis very attractive.Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the laparoscopic approach and the conventional technique in the treatment of acute appendicitis.Method: This prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted at CMH, Savar Cantonment and Navy Hospital, BNS Patenga, Chittagong. A total of 86 patients who underwent appendicectomy during December 2009 to March 2011 were included in this study. A total of 40 patients had laparoscopic appendicectomy and 46 underwent open procedure. Clinical outcome measures were compared between the two groups with respect to several variables.Results: Among the study population, the operating time was shorter for the OA patients than for the LA patients (LA, 35 min vs. OA, 30 min; p value 0.33), which is not statistically significant. The differences in hospital stay of 4 days for the LA group and 8 days for the OA group and p value 0.01 which is statistically significant. Return to oral diet was same in both groups with no statistical difference LA, 20 h vs. OA, 22 h; return to work LA was 14 days vs. OA 18 days. Although the rate for overall complications was lower in the LA group 5% vs. 18% in OA; p value 0.001 which is statistically significant.Conclusion: The laparoscopic approach to appendicectomy in patients with acute appendicitis does offer a significant advantage over the open approach in terms of length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, or quality of life, which are considered as the major advantages of minimally invasive surgery.Journal of Armed Forces Medical College Bangladesh Vol.10(2) 2014

show abstract

Laparoscopic Interval Appendectomy Versus Open Interval Appendectomy

Cited by 35 publications

References 18 publications

Superioridad clínica de la apendicectomía laparoscópica sobre la técnica abierta: ¿adopción lenta de un nuevo estándar de tratamiento?

Superioridad clínica de la apendicectomía laparoscópica sobre la técnica abierta: ¿adopción lenta de un nuevo estándar de tratamiento?

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopy for treatment of surgical site infection: A randomized control trial

Comparison of Laparoscopic versus Open Appendicectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About