Open Appendectomy

2017 ◽  
pp. 169-171
Author(s):  
Edward Cho ◽  
Samy Maklad
Keyword(s):  
Open Appendectomy

Mini-incision open appendectomy: An analysis of 70 cases of acute appendicitis

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-67
Author(s):  
Kunal Babulal Pisre ◽  
◽  
Pravin Govande ◽  
Satish Gireboinwad ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Appendicitis ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Mini Incision

scholarly journals Laparoscopic appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis—a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franziska Köhler ◽  
Anne Hendricks ◽  
Carolin Kastner ◽  
Sophie Müller ◽  
Kevin Boerner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Antibiotic Treatment ◽  
Laparoscopic Appendectomy ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pubmed Database ◽  
Uncomplicated Appendicitis ◽  
Absence From Work

Abstract Background Over the last years, laparoscopic appendectomy has progressively replaced open appendectomy and become the current gold standard treatment for suspected, uncomplicated appendicitis. At the same time, though, it is an ongoing discussion that antibiotic therapy can be an equivalent treatment for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the safety and efficacy of antibiotic therapy and compare it to the laparoscopic appendectomy for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis. Methods The PubMed database, Embase database, and Cochrane library were scanned for studies comparing laparoscopic appendectomy with antibiotic treatment. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction. The primary endpoint was defined as successful treatment of appendicitis. Secondary endpoints were pain intensity, duration of hospitalization, absence from work, and incidence of complications. Results No studies were found that exclusively compared laparoscopic appendectomy with antibiotic treatment for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis. Conclusions To date, there are no studies comparing antibiotic treatment to laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis, thus emphasizing the lack of evidence and need for further investigation.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy for Complicated and Uncomplicated Appendicitis in Children

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1993-2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheraz R. Markar ◽  
Simon Blackburn ◽  
Richard Cobb ◽  
Alan Karthikesalingam ◽  
Jessica Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Uncomplicated Appendicitis ◽  
Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of nonoperative management versus open and laparoscopic surgery for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in Colombia

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
César Augusto Guevara-Cuellar ◽  
María Paula Rengifo-Mosquera ◽  
Elizabeth Parody-Rúa
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Nonoperative Management ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Monetary Benefit ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis ◽  
Net Monetary Benefit

Abstract Background Traditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer’s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results LA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was $24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient. Conclusions LA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer’s perspective in the Colombian health system.

Association of Wound Infection with Various Surgical Technique Applied for Appendectomy in Diabetic and Hypertensive Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 2163-2165
Author(s):  
Muhammad Armughan ◽  
Imran Sadiq ◽  
Shafqat Mukhtar ◽  
Hafiz Ahmad Altaf
Keyword(s):  
Wound Infection ◽  
Laparoscopic Appendectomy ◽  
Surgical Procedure ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Perforated Appendicitis ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Wound Infections ◽  
Hypertensive Patients ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Perforated Appendix

Background: Perforated appendix in diabetic as well as hypertensive patients is associated with elevated risks of postoperative infectious complications such as wound infection and intra-abdominal abscess. Objective: To identify better appendectomy procedure for diabetic and hypertensive patients. Study Design: Randomized Controlled Trial Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery, Unit l, Bahawal Victoria Hospital Bahawalpur from 10th October 2020 to 9th April 2021. Methodology: Ninety eight patients meeting the criteria of perforated appendix were divided in two groups; one group consisted of 49 patients who were managed by open surgical procedure. Second group was consisted of 49 patients who were managed by laparoscopic surgical procedure. Patient outcomes in-terms of wound infections, operative time and duration of surgery was assessed. Results: Mean age of patients was 25.49±6.03 years. There were 17 hypertensive while 15 diabetic patients. Wound infection was seen in 21% and 28% open surgery diabetic and hypertensive patients respectively in comparison to 10%and 8% in laparoscopic appendectomy diabetic and hypertensive patients respectively (p<0.001). Conclusion: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is associated with significantly lower rates of post-operative wound infections and shorter hospital stay in comparison to open appendectomy in diabetic and hypertensive patients of perforated appendicitis. Key Words: Perforated appendix, laparoscopic, open appendectomy

LMA PROSEAL: AN ALTERNATIVE TO ENDOTRACHEAL IN- TUBATION IN OPEN APPENDECTOMY OPERATION.' IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOLKATA

2021 ◽  
pp. 74-76
Author(s):  
Manas Karmakar ◽  
Pallab Kanti Nath ◽  
Ashok Das
Keyword(s):  
Endotracheal Tube ◽  
West Bengal ◽  
Operative Procedure ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Open Appendicectomy ◽  
Safe Alternative ◽  
Operation Theatre ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Airway Devices ◽  
Strict Protocol

INTRODUCTION One of the important responsibilities of an Anaesthesiologist is to maintain a patent airway during any surgical procedure. Since the early days of Anaesthesia, various efforts have been made to dispel the problem of airway maintenance. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES The study entitled “LMAProSeal: An alternative to endotracheal intubation in open appendicectomy operation” was conducted with the aims to compare the efcacy of LMA ProSeal and Endotracheal Tube in patients undergoing Open Appendectomy under General Anaesthesia. MATERIALAND METHODS Study Area: This study was conducted in Medical College, Kolkata (West Bengal), under the department of Anaesthesiology in General Surgery Operation Theatre (C. B. Top OT/ Green OTComplex), after clearance from the Hospital ethical committee, during the period from 1st may 2013 to 31st January 2014. Awritten informed consent was taken from all patients included in the study. StudyPopulation:Patients postedforopenAppendicectomyoperationwithBMIbetween18.50–24.99kg/m2andbodyweightbetween30—60kg. Sample Size: 100 RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS The effects were observed by monitoring heart rate, blood pressure and SPO2 preoperatively (as baseline), after intubation or placement of LMAProSeal at 1 min, 3 mins, 5mins and every 5 mins thereafter till the reading at removal of the device. For both the groups baseline ETCO2 was taken from connection of ETCO2 cable following placement of airway devices. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The study revealed that both the airway devices (ET tube and LMA ProSeal) were successful in operative procedure (open appendicectomy) in all the patients without any signicant complication. In experienced hands and following a strict protocol of insertion, the LMA ProSeal can prove to be an efcient and safe alternative to endotracheal tube for airway management of elective patients undergoing laparotomy procedure like open appendicectomy.

scholarly journals Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy: A Retrospective Analysis of 2,745 Patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ye-Won Jun ◽  
Hun Jung ◽  
Sung-Jeep Kim ◽  
Kyong Hwa Jun ◽  
Hyung Min Chin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Open Appendectomy

scholarly journals Hospitalization time after open appendectomy by three different surgical techniques

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 188-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agláia Moreira Garcia XIMENES ◽  
Fernando Salvo Torres MELLO ◽  
Zailton Bezerra de LIMA-JÚNIOR ◽  
Cícero Faustino FERREIRA ◽  
Amanda Dantas Ferreira CAVALCANTI ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Acute Appendicitis ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Open Appendectomy ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Conventional Technique ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Hospitalization Time ◽  
Contingency Coefficient ◽  
Appendicular Stump

BACKGROUND: The choice of surgical technique to approach the appendicular stump depends mostly on skill and personal preference of the surgeon or on the protocol used in the service, and the influence of this choice in hospitalization time is not evaluated. AIM: To evaluate the relation between surgical technique and postoperative hospitalization time in patients presenting with acute appendicitis. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 180 patients who underwent open appendectomy. These where divided into three groups according to surgical technique: conventional appendectomy (simple ligation of the stump), tobacco pouch suture and Parker-Kerr suture. Data where crossed with hospitalization time (until three days, from four to six days and over seven days). RESULTS: A hundred and eighty patients with age from 15 to 85 years where included. From these, 95 underwent conventional technique, had an average hospitalization time of 3,9 days and seven had complications (surgical site infection, seroma, suture dehiscence and evisceration). In 67 patients, tobacco pouch suture was chosen and had average hospitalization time of 3,7 days and two complications (infection and seroma). In 18 Parker-Kerr suture was made, with average hospitalization time of 2,6 days, with no complication. Contingency coefficient between the variables hospitalization time and technique was 0,255 and Cramér's V was 0,186. CONCLUSION: There was tendency to larger hospitalization time and larger number of complications in conventional appendectomy, whereas in patients where Parker-Kerr suture was performed, hospitalization time was significantly smaller.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document