You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 132 No. 7, July 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  PAPERS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (59)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Laparoscopic vs Open Appendectomy

Prospective Randomized Study of Outcomes

Lisa Minné, MD; Dale Varner, MD; Arline Burnell, MD; Erick Ratzer, MD; Jeffrey Clark, MD; William Haun, MD

Arch Surg. 1997;132(7):708-712.


Abstract

Objective
To compare open appendectomy (OA) with laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for length of the operation, complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, postdischarge recovery time, and hospital charges.

Design:

Prospective randomized clinical trial of patients with acute appendicitis.

Setting
Tertiary care, urban teaching hospital.

Patients
A population-based sample of patients (aged ≥ 12 years; weight, >49.7 kg) admitted to a surgical teaching service with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Patients were prospectively randomized to either OA or LA during a 20-month period (from April 1, 1994, to December 31, 1995). Fifty-seven patients were initially enrolled in the study; 7 did not complete the study because of a protocol violation. All remaining patients completed the study, including postdischarge follow-up.

Interventions
Two (7.4%) of the 27 patients in the LA group required conversion to OA because of technical difficulties. One patient (in the OA group) underwent a second surgical procedure for drainage of a pelvic abscess. Three patients (in the LA group) required second surgical procedures. For analysis, no crossovers were allowed and all patients remained in their originally randomized group.

Main Outcome Measures
Length of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, postdischarge recovery time, and hospital charges.

Results
Fifty patients (19 women and 31 men) were examined. Twenty-seven patients underwent LA, 2 requiring conversion to an OA. Twenty-three patients underwent an OA. Patient demographics were similar between groups. Statistical differences between the 2 groups were found for (1) length of the operation (median, 81.7 vs 66.8 minutes, LA vs OA group; P<.002), (2) operating room charges (median, $3191 vs $1514, LA vs OA group; P<.001), and (3) total hospital charges (median, $5430 vs $3673, LA vs OA group; P<.001). No statistical differences between the 2 groups were found for (1) length of hospitalization (median, 1.1 vs 1.2 days, LA vs OA group), (2) pain control (mean, 4 vs 3.7 of 10 [0 indicates least pain; 10, most pain], LA vs OA group), (3) recovery time (time necessary before returning to work or school) (median, 14.0 days for both groups), and (4) complications (5 vs 1, LA vs OA group).

Conclusions
Laparoscopic appendectomies and OAs are comparable for complications, postoperative pain control, length of hospitalization, and recovery time. Patients who underwent an OA had a shorter operative time and lower operating room and hospital charges. Laparoscopic appendectomy does not offer any proved benefits compared with the open approach for the routine patient with acute appendicitis.

Arch Surg. 1997;132:708-712



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Surgical Education, St Joseph Hospital, Denver, Colo.



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

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Minimally Invasive: Minimally Reimbursed? An Examination of Six Laparoscopic Surgical Procedures
Roumm et al.
SURG INNOV 2005;12:261-287.
ABSTRACT  

Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Indications and Controversies
Fischer et al.
SURG INNOV 2002;9:32-39.
ABSTRACT  

Ambulatory Laparoscopic Surgery
Beretvas and Brody
SURG INNOV 1999;6:17-20.
ABSTRACT  

Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children
Blakely et al.
SURG INNOV 1998;5:14-18.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1997 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.