Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy

An analysis of outcomes at a single institution

F. Paul Buckley, Hannah Vassaur, Sharon Monsivais, Daniel Jupiter, Rob Watson, John Eckford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Questions have emerged as to whether single-incision laparoscopy has reproducible or superior patient outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopy. A retrospective review comparing single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) appendectomy and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) appendectomy was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the less invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods: All SILS and MP appendectomies performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 43 months were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographic data including age and gender, as well as bi- and multi-variate analyses of operative outcomes including operative time, conversions, complications, and hospital length of stay. Results: The study reviewed 168 patients who underwent SILS appendectomy and 108 patients who underwent MP appendectomy. No statistically significant difference was found between the mean SILS and MP operative times (43.63 vs. 40.95 min; p = 0.29). Additionally, no statistically significant association was noted between surgical approach and length of hospital stay. Although 0.93% of MP appendectomies and 2.38% of SILS appendectomies were converted to open procedure, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.65, Fisher's exact test). After exclusion of cases converted to open procedure from the study, the findings showed that 3.66% of SILS cases were converted to multiport laparoscopy. No increase in the overall complication rate was associated with SILS compared with MP appendectomy. The wound complications documented included one incisional hernia for SILS appendectomy and two wound infections for MP appendectomy. Conclusion: The findings showed SILS appendectomy to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP appendectomy that can be conducted with operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates similar to those of the standardized technique. This review is a precursor to prospective studies, which are warranted to demonstrate conclusively the equivalence of operative times, complications, and lengths of hospital stay, as well as to elucidate differences in patient-centered outcomes including postoperative pain, cosmesis, and quality of life.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)626-630
Number of pages5
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume28
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Appendectomy
Length of Stay
Operative Time
Laparoscopy
Wound Infection
Postoperative Pain
Quality of Life
Demography

Keywords

  • Abdominal
  • Appendix
  • Clinical papers/ trials/research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy : An analysis of outcomes at a single institution. / Buckley, F. Paul; Vassaur, Hannah; Monsivais, Sharon; Jupiter, Daniel; Watson, Rob; Eckford, John.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2014, p. 626-630.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9e70fbe5ddba4af2acb1c375886d1388,
title = "Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: An analysis of outcomes at a single institution",
abstract = "Background: Questions have emerged as to whether single-incision laparoscopy has reproducible or superior patient outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopy. A retrospective review comparing single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) appendectomy and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) appendectomy was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the less invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods: All SILS and MP appendectomies performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 43 months were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographic data including age and gender, as well as bi- and multi-variate analyses of operative outcomes including operative time, conversions, complications, and hospital length of stay. Results: The study reviewed 168 patients who underwent SILS appendectomy and 108 patients who underwent MP appendectomy. No statistically significant difference was found between the mean SILS and MP operative times (43.63 vs. 40.95 min; p = 0.29). Additionally, no statistically significant association was noted between surgical approach and length of hospital stay. Although 0.93{\%} of MP appendectomies and 2.38{\%} of SILS appendectomies were converted to open procedure, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.65, Fisher's exact test). After exclusion of cases converted to open procedure from the study, the findings showed that 3.66{\%} of SILS cases were converted to multiport laparoscopy. No increase in the overall complication rate was associated with SILS compared with MP appendectomy. The wound complications documented included one incisional hernia for SILS appendectomy and two wound infections for MP appendectomy. Conclusion: The findings showed SILS appendectomy to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP appendectomy that can be conducted with operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates similar to those of the standardized technique. This review is a precursor to prospective studies, which are warranted to demonstrate conclusively the equivalence of operative times, complications, and lengths of hospital stay, as well as to elucidate differences in patient-centered outcomes including postoperative pain, cosmesis, and quality of life.",
keywords = "Abdominal, Appendix, Clinical papers/ trials/research",
author = "Buckley, {F. Paul} and Hannah Vassaur and Sharon Monsivais and Daniel Jupiter and Rob Watson and John Eckford",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-013-3219-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "626--630",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy

T2 - An analysis of outcomes at a single institution

AU - Buckley, F. Paul

AU - Vassaur, Hannah

AU - Monsivais, Sharon

AU - Jupiter, Daniel

AU - Watson, Rob

AU - Eckford, John

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Questions have emerged as to whether single-incision laparoscopy has reproducible or superior patient outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopy. A retrospective review comparing single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) appendectomy and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) appendectomy was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the less invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods: All SILS and MP appendectomies performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 43 months were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographic data including age and gender, as well as bi- and multi-variate analyses of operative outcomes including operative time, conversions, complications, and hospital length of stay. Results: The study reviewed 168 patients who underwent SILS appendectomy and 108 patients who underwent MP appendectomy. No statistically significant difference was found between the mean SILS and MP operative times (43.63 vs. 40.95 min; p = 0.29). Additionally, no statistically significant association was noted between surgical approach and length of hospital stay. Although 0.93% of MP appendectomies and 2.38% of SILS appendectomies were converted to open procedure, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.65, Fisher's exact test). After exclusion of cases converted to open procedure from the study, the findings showed that 3.66% of SILS cases were converted to multiport laparoscopy. No increase in the overall complication rate was associated with SILS compared with MP appendectomy. The wound complications documented included one incisional hernia for SILS appendectomy and two wound infections for MP appendectomy. Conclusion: The findings showed SILS appendectomy to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP appendectomy that can be conducted with operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates similar to those of the standardized technique. This review is a precursor to prospective studies, which are warranted to demonstrate conclusively the equivalence of operative times, complications, and lengths of hospital stay, as well as to elucidate differences in patient-centered outcomes including postoperative pain, cosmesis, and quality of life.

AB - Background: Questions have emerged as to whether single-incision laparoscopy has reproducible or superior patient outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopy. A retrospective review comparing single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) appendectomy and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) appendectomy was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the less invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods: All SILS and MP appendectomies performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 43 months were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographic data including age and gender, as well as bi- and multi-variate analyses of operative outcomes including operative time, conversions, complications, and hospital length of stay. Results: The study reviewed 168 patients who underwent SILS appendectomy and 108 patients who underwent MP appendectomy. No statistically significant difference was found between the mean SILS and MP operative times (43.63 vs. 40.95 min; p = 0.29). Additionally, no statistically significant association was noted between surgical approach and length of hospital stay. Although 0.93% of MP appendectomies and 2.38% of SILS appendectomies were converted to open procedure, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.65, Fisher's exact test). After exclusion of cases converted to open procedure from the study, the findings showed that 3.66% of SILS cases were converted to multiport laparoscopy. No increase in the overall complication rate was associated with SILS compared with MP appendectomy. The wound complications documented included one incisional hernia for SILS appendectomy and two wound infections for MP appendectomy. Conclusion: The findings showed SILS appendectomy to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP appendectomy that can be conducted with operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates similar to those of the standardized technique. This review is a precursor to prospective studies, which are warranted to demonstrate conclusively the equivalence of operative times, complications, and lengths of hospital stay, as well as to elucidate differences in patient-centered outcomes including postoperative pain, cosmesis, and quality of life.

KW - Abdominal

KW - Appendix

KW - Clinical papers/ trials/research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899063992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899063992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-013-3219-6

DO - 10.1007/s00464-013-3219-6

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 626

EP - 630

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 2

ER -