This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (19)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David Street, MD; Balazs I. Bodai, MD; Leon J. Owens, MD; Daniel B. Moore, MD; Charles B. Walton, MD; James W. Holcroft, MD

Arch Surg. 1988;123(6):689-690.

Abstract
• The records of 886 patients who had appendectomy performed by the same surgeons within a five-year period were used to contrast appendiceal stump inversion vs simple ligation. Our analysis contrasted inversion vs simple ligation techniques as related to postoperative complications, hospital stay, and pathologic diagnosis. Adhesions requiring repeated operation to relieve bowel obstruction occurred in five of 87 patients with acute gangrenous appendicitis treated by inversion. Of 106 patients with acute gangrenous appendicitis treated with simple ligation, postoperative obstruction developed in none. No other statistically significant differences existed between the two techniques. These data suggest that simple ligation is at least as good as and probably better than inversion of the appendiceal stump.

(Arch Surg 1988;123:689-690)

Author Affiliations
From the Departments of Surgery, University of California, Davis (Drs Street, Bodai, Owens, Moore, Walton, and Holcroft), and Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Sacramento, Calif (Drs Bodai, Moore, and Walton).

Footnotes
Accepted for publication July 20, 1987.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, 2025 Morse Ave, Sacramento, CA 95825 (Dr Bodai).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Simple Ligation vs Stump Inversion in Appendectomy
RUBIO
Arch Surg 1988;123:1526-1526.
ABSTRACT