Technical modifications of appendiceal transection during laparoscopic appendectomy

Česká verzia

Authors: P. Ihnát; M. Tesař; L. Tulinský ; P. Vávra
Authors place of work: Chirurgická klinika, Fakultní nemocnice Ostrava
Published in the journal: Rozhl. Chir., 2020, roč. 99, č. 12, s. 534-538.
Category: Original articles

Summary

Introduction: Appendiceal transection is the most critical part of laparoscopic appendectomy (LAPPE). The aim of our study was to evaluate postoperative and economic outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy with different technical modifications of transection of the appendix.

Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, unicenter clinical study comparing different techniques of appendiceal transection in patients with acute appendicitis during the study period (18 months). The patients were randomized to one of three arms – endoloop, hem-o-lok clips and the stapler.

Results: In total, 120 patients were enrolled in the study. The shortest operative time was noted in the hem-o-lok arm (37.3 minutes); mean length of hospital stay (3.7 days) was comparable in all study arms. Postoperative morbidity was 6.6%; all recorded complications were SSIs (Surgical Site Infections). The number of postoperative complications was comparable in all study arms.

Mean direct costs of laparoscopic appendectomy were lowest in the hem-o-lok arm. According to our findings, LAPPE is not a profit making surgery irrespective of the type of appendiceal transection (mean profit in the study patients was CZK -4019).

Conclusion: The rate of postoperative complications was similar for all the technical modifications of appendiceal stump closure. As indicated by the study outcomes, hem-o-lok clips have the potential of becoming the method of choice in securing the appendix base during LAPPE.

Keywords:

laparoscopic appendectomy – appendiceal transection − postoperative complications – acute appendicitis – economic costs

Zdroje

Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Arimoto Y, et al. Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1929−1939. doi:10.1007/s11605-012-1972-9.
National Surgical Research Collaborative. Multicentre observational study of performance variation in provision and outcome of emergency appendicectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1240−1252. doi:10.1002/bjs.9201.
McCoy AC, Gasevic E, Szlabick RE, et al. Are open abdominal procedures a thing of the past? An analysis of graduating general surgery residents’case logs from 2000 to 2011. J Surg Educ. 2013;70:683−689. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.09.002.
Li X, Zhang J, Sang L, et al. Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy – a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010;10:129. doi:10.1186/1471-230X-10-129.
Dai L, Shuai J. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults and children: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2017;4:542−553. doi:10.1177/2050640616661931.
Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;6:CD001546. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001546.pub3.
Guller U, Hervey S, Purves H, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database. Ann Surg. 2004;239:43−52. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000103071.35986.c1.
Matyja M, Strzałka M, Rembiasz K. Laparoscopic appendectomy, cost-effectiveness of three different techniques used to close the apendix stump. Pol Przegl Chir. 2015;87(12):634−637. doi:10.1515/pjs-2016-0015.
Mannu GS, Sudul MK, Bettencourt-Silva JH, et al. Closure methods of the apendix stump for complications during laparoscopic appendectomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;11:CD006437. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006437.pub3.
Costa-Navarro D, Jimenes-Fuertes M, Illian-Riquelme A. Laparoscopic appendectomy: quality care and cost effectiveness for today’s economy. World J Emerg Surg. 2013;8(1):45. doi:10.1186/1749-7922-8-45.
Gomes CA, Junior CS, de Peixoto RO, et al. Appendiceal stump closure by metal endoclip in the management of complicated acute appendicitis. World J Emerg Surg. 2013;8:35. doi:10.1186/1749-7922-8-35.
Delibegović S, Mehmedovic Z. The influence of the different forms of appendix base closure on patient outcome in laparoscopic appendectomy: a randomized trial. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(5):2295−2299. doi:10.1007/s00464-017-5924-z.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205−213. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
GlobalSurg Collaborative. Laparoscopy in management of appendicitis in high-, middle-, and low-income countries: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(8):3450−3466. doi:10.1007/s00464-018-6064-9.
Lv B, Zhang X, Li J, et al. Absorbable polymeric surgical clips for appendicular stump closure: A randomized control trial of laparoscopic appendectomy with lapro-clips. Oncotarget 2016;7(27):41265−41273. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.9283.
Sadat-Safavi SA, Nasiri S, Shojaiefard A, et al. Comparison the effect of stump closure by endoclips versus endoloop on the duration of surgery and complications in patients under laparoscopic appendectomy: A randomized clinical trial. J Res Med Sci. 2016;21:87. doi:10.4103/1735-1995.192503.
Hanssen A, Plotnikov S, Dubois R. Laparoscopic appendectomy using a polymeric clip to close the appendicular stump. JSLS 2007;11:59−62.
Rickert A, Krüger CM, Runkel N, et al. The TICAP-Study (Titanium clips for appendicular stump closure): A prospective multicentre observational study on appendicular stump closure with an innovative titanium clip. BMC Surg. 2015;15:85. doi:10.1186/s12893-015-0068-3.
Safavi A, Langer M, Skarsgard ED. Endoloop versus endostapler closure of the appendiceal stump in pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy. Can J Surg. 2012;55(1):37−40. doi: 10.1503/cjs.023810.
Caglià P, Tracia A, Spataro D, et al. Appendix stump closure with endoloop in laparoscopic appendectomy. Ann Ital Chir. 2014;85(6):606−609.