The Incision Made in the Abdominal Wall in Cases of Appendicitis, With a Description of a New Method of Operating

McBurney, Charles

doi:10.1097/00000658-189407000-00004

Cited by 342 publications

(195 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

180

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2 Appendectomy is one of the operations which are most commonly performed by the general surgeons. Open appendectomy (OA) has been the gold standard for the treatment of acute appendicitis since its introduction by Mc Burney C. 3 Unfortunately the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is often difficult, mainly clinical and always challenging. An accepted negative appendicectomy rate for presumed appendicitis ranges from 15% to 20%, even higher in women of childbearing age (20% to 30%).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparative study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The advantages of laparoscopic appendicectomy over open appendicectomy were questioned because the recovery period with open appendicectomy was brief. In this study, the two techniques were compared with respect to post-operative pain and duration of us of an analgesic, complications such as vomiting, ileus, intra-abdominal abscess, wound infection, length of post-operative stay, and return to routine work.Methods: 50 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study was subjected to either of the two procedures after randomisation and statistical analysis was done.Results: The patients who underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy had less post-operative pain with lesser analgesic use, less post- operative complications such as vomiting, ileus, wound infection, shorter hospital stay and early return to routine work.Conclusions: Laparoscopic appendicectomy is a better procedure in selected patients with acute or recurrent appendicitis.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparative study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be done with open appendectomy (OA) or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). OA was first introduced by McBurney in 1894 and was for decades the gold-standard treatment for appendicitis [4][5][6]. In 1983, along with advances in endoscopic surgery, LA was first described as an optional technique for removing the appendix.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic or Open Appendectomy for Pediatric Appendicitis?

Elofsson¹,

Gemryd²,

Arnbjörnsson³

et al. 2016

MOJS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study aimed to compare open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in children by analyzing the differences in outcomes between the two techniques. Materials and Methods:This was a single-institution retrospective study. Data were collected from the medical records of all children <15 years of age who underwent an appendectomy from 2006 through 2014. Preoperative parameters, appendicitis severity, surgery time, complications, pain treatment, and postoperative outcome including days of hospital stay were collected. LA was performed with a two-or three-port technique, and a McBurney incision was adopted for OA. Conversions were regarded as OA.Results: A total of 406 appendectomies were performed during the study period, 146 (36%) OA (61 conversions) and 260 (64%) LA. No differences were found between the two groups regarding surgery time, operative and postoperative complications, and postoperative pain treatment. In cases of Phlegmonous appendicitis, LA was associated with a significantly shorter median hospital stay than was OA (1 and 1.8 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Healthy and Phlegmonous appendices were more commonly treated with LA (p < 0.01 for both); gangrenous, perforated, and abscessed appendices were more commonly treated with open surgery (p = 0.02, p < 0.01, and p < 0.01, respectively). Conclusion:The study identified no disadvantages of LA compared with OA. Therefore, LA should be the preferred technique because it is associated with a shorter hospital stay for patients with Phlegmonous appendicitis and also allows inspection of the abdominal cavity, a major diagnostic advantage. result from lack of experience in the technique. This difference will decrease as surgeons receive more training in endoscopic surgery [15]. Keywords:Since the introduction of LA the use of this surgical method has increased, making it the method of first choice [9]. The long transition period and the continued use of both techniques are due to the split opinion among surgeons and the lack of experience in endoscopic surgery [9]. According to a 2008 national cohort study of children and adults, 33% of appendectomies began as LA and 66% began as OA [16]. In 1992, the rate of intended LA was only 4%; prior to that year the procedure was performed only sporadically [16]. In patients aged 0-9 years, 4% of appendectomies performed from 1992 to 2008 were laparoscopic; in those aged 10-19 years, the rate was 18% [16]. LA was performed less commonly in children than in the population as a whole (the LA rate for the total population from 1992 to 2008 was 20%) [16].The aim of this study was to compare OA and LA in children with regard to perioperative parameters and postoperative outcome. The intention was to provide information of value to surgeons making the decision to perform appendectomy for a child. The question is whether LA or OA leads to the better outcome when treating pediatric appendicitis. Materials and Methods Settings and childrenAll children underwent surgery at the Department o...

show abstract

“…[1][2] Open appendicectomy was the usual treatment for appendicitis, since the description of the technique by McBurney in 1894. 1,3 The first experimental laparoscopy was performed in 1901 by Dr. George Kelling in a dog, who maintained a prolonged experimental phase so this could posteriorly be performed for first time in humans in 1983 by Semm and in children in 1994; since then, the efficiency and superiority of the laparoscopic management in comparison with the open technique has been a debate topic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectivity of the PGA rapid Atramat® and PGA Atramat® sutures for the closure of minimal invasion and abdominal-inguinal wounds in surgery

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The use of suture materials for the closure of wounds is a practice described in Egyptian parchments since 3500 b.C. through the use of linen, animal hair, vegetable fiber, silk, leather and others. The election of the ideal suture material has to be based in the appropriate resistance to traction, tissue biocompatibility and resorption rates..Methods: An open longitudinal clinical trial was performed with data recollection in a prospective way, in which was calculated the incidence of complications; dehiscence, wound seroma, surgical site infection hemorrhage and abscess when PGA Atramat® and PGA rapid Atramat® was employed in laparoscopic and open surgery for treatment of inguinal and umbilical plasties.Results: During the period from January 2016 to August 2016, the procedures included: 31 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, 18 laparoscopic fundoplications, 45 laparoscopic appendicectomies, 12 abdominal plasties and 16 inguinal plasties. This series shows the null incidence of complications in 31 cholecystectomies, 18 fundoplications, 16 inguinal plasties and 12 abdominal plasties.Conclusions: The employment of the PGA Atramat® and PGA rapid Atramat® sutures maintains the features of a braided, absorbable suture, and it also results a feasible and secure resource for its use in minimal invasion surgery, abdominal and inguinal plasties, showing low incidence of surgical site infection.

show abstract

The Incision Made in the Abdominal Wall in Cases of Appendicitis, With a Description of a New Method of Operating

Cited by 342 publications

References 0 publications

Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparative study

Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparative study

Laparoscopic or Open Appendectomy for Pediatric Appendicitis?

Effectivity of the PGA rapid Atramat® and PGA Atramat® sutures for the closure of minimal invasion and abdominal-inguinal wounds in surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About