TY - JOUR
T1 - Should single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy be the new standard for pediatric appendicitis?
AU - Chang, Paul Chia Yu
AU - Lin, Sheng Chieh
AU - Duh, Yih Cherng
AU - Huang, Hsuan
AU - Fu, Yu Wei
AU - Hsu, Yao Jen
AU - Wei, Chin Hung
N1 - Funding Information:
The research is funded by Shuang Ho Hospital, Taiwan , grant number 108YSR-05 .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
PY - 2020/8
Y1 - 2020/8
N2 - Background: To compare single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) with conventional (CLA) and transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into three groups, SILA, CLA, and TULA. SILA was defined as performing appendectomy extracorporeally or intracorporeally by using a glove-port incorporated with 3 trocars. TULA was defined as exteriorizing appendix and performing extracorporeal appendectomy by using an operative telescope. Statistical analysis was conducted in patients with simple (SA) and complicated appendicitis (CA), respectively. Results: A total of 315 patients were enrolled, including 161 in SILA, 105 in CLA, and 49 in TULA. Demographic data were similar. In patients with simple appendicitis, operation time of SILA was shorter than CLA but longer than TULA (62.8 ± 22.5 vs. 82.2 ± 24.3 and 51.6 ± 22.3 min, p < 0.01). SILA had shorter hospital stay than CLA, and similar to TULA (56.1 ± 20.4 vs. 71.5 ± 37.8 and 56.9 ± 19.0 h, p < 0.01). In patients with complicated appendicitis, SILA had shorter operation time than CLA, but a similar time to TULA (80.9 ± 22.4 vs. 105.7 ± 28.8 and 82.5 ± 31.2 min, p < 0.01). Conversion to open surgery was not required in all groups. The rates of complications, such as wound infection, intraabdominal abscess and adhesion ileus, were similar. SILA required fewer additional ports than TULA in both simple and complicated appendicitis (1.1% vs. 13.5%, and 9.6% vs. 41.7%, p < 0.01). Conclusion: SILA has the advantages of shorter operation time and hospital stay over CLA as well as a lower rate of additional ports than TULA.
AB - Background: To compare single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) with conventional (CLA) and transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into three groups, SILA, CLA, and TULA. SILA was defined as performing appendectomy extracorporeally or intracorporeally by using a glove-port incorporated with 3 trocars. TULA was defined as exteriorizing appendix and performing extracorporeal appendectomy by using an operative telescope. Statistical analysis was conducted in patients with simple (SA) and complicated appendicitis (CA), respectively. Results: A total of 315 patients were enrolled, including 161 in SILA, 105 in CLA, and 49 in TULA. Demographic data were similar. In patients with simple appendicitis, operation time of SILA was shorter than CLA but longer than TULA (62.8 ± 22.5 vs. 82.2 ± 24.3 and 51.6 ± 22.3 min, p < 0.01). SILA had shorter hospital stay than CLA, and similar to TULA (56.1 ± 20.4 vs. 71.5 ± 37.8 and 56.9 ± 19.0 h, p < 0.01). In patients with complicated appendicitis, SILA had shorter operation time than CLA, but a similar time to TULA (80.9 ± 22.4 vs. 105.7 ± 28.8 and 82.5 ± 31.2 min, p < 0.01). Conversion to open surgery was not required in all groups. The rates of complications, such as wound infection, intraabdominal abscess and adhesion ileus, were similar. SILA required fewer additional ports than TULA in both simple and complicated appendicitis (1.1% vs. 13.5%, and 9.6% vs. 41.7%, p < 0.01). Conclusion: SILA has the advantages of shorter operation time and hospital stay over CLA as well as a lower rate of additional ports than TULA.
KW - appendicitis
KW - children
KW - laparoscopy appendectomy
KW - single-incision
KW - transumbilical laparoscopy-assisted appendectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083327101&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85083327101&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pedneo.2020.03.013
DO - 10.1016/j.pedneo.2020.03.013
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85083327101
SN - 1875-9572
VL - 61
SP - 426
EP - 431
JO - Pediatrics and Neonatology
JF - Pediatrics and Neonatology
IS - 4
ER -