PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16553194

[Laparoscopic appendectomy--considerations in about 1000 cases].

R Munteanu·C Copăescu·M Liţescu·F Turcu·R Iosifescu·Lucica Timişescu·O Ginghină·C Dragomirescu
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is a well spread method today, but not as largely accepted as cholecystectomy, the cure of gastro-esophageal reflux and some other procedures (relatively small in number) for which the laparoscopic approach is the golden standard. Otherwise it is improbable that LA will gain such a status, at least in the near future. On the other hand it is obvious that LA offers important advantages for some special situations: the right iliac area syndrome, obesity, professional sportsmen, abnormal localization of the appendix, as well for the cases when localized and especially diffuse peritonitis is associated. Our paper analyses the experience of General Surgery Department at the "St.John" Emergency Hospital Bucharest on laparoscopic appendectomy. The retrospective study includes 996 cases that were treated laparoscopic between 1996-2004. Of these 745 cases were catarrhal, 166 cases were phlegmonous and 76 gangrenous appendicitis. In 93 cases localized or diffuse peritonitis was associated. There were recorded also 3 cases of each of the following: chronic appendicitis, appendicular mass and mucocele. The number of conversions was 28 (2.81%). There were also 10 reinterventions (1.004%), 7 because of intraperitoneal abscess and we also recorded one death.

Explore related subjects

AppendectomyAppendicitisHumansLaparoscopyMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEnglish AbstractJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Munteanu, C Copăescu, M Liţescu, F Turcu, R Iosifescu, Lucica Timişescu, O Ginghină, C Dragomirescu. [Laparoscopic appendectomy--considerations in about 1000 cases].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16553194/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

The natural history and traditional management of appendicitis revisited: spontaneous resolution and predominance of prehospital perforations imply that a correct diagnosis is more important than an early diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: The principle of early exploration on wide indications in order to prevent perforation has been the guiding star for the management of patients with suspected appendicitis for over 100 years, dating back to a time when appendicitis was a significant cause of mortality. Since then there has been a dramatic decrease in mortality due to appendicitis. Emerging evidence calls for a new understanding of the natural history of untreated appendicitis. This motivates a reappraisal of the fundamental principles for the management of patients with suspected appendicitis. METHODS: Analysis of epidemiologic and clinical studies that elucidate the natural history of appendicitis, i.e. the possibility of spontaneous resolution or the risk of progression to perforation, the determinants of the proportion of perforations and mortality, and the consequence of in-hospital delay. RESULTS: The results presented in a number of studies suggest that spontaneous resolution of appendicitis is common, that perforation can seldom be prevented, that the risk of perforation has been exaggerated and that in-hospital delay is safe. An alternative understanding of the inverse relationship between the proportion of negative explorations and perforation and the increasing proportion of perforation with length of time is presented, mainly explaining these findings by selection due to spontaneous resolution. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that spontaneous resolution of untreated, non-perforated appendicitis is common and that perforation can rarely be prevented and is associated with a lower increase in mortality than was previously thought. This motivates a shift in focus from the prevention of perforation to the early detection and treatment of advanced appendicitis. In order to minimize mortality, morbidity and costs avoidance of negative appendectomies is more important then preventing perforation. In patients with an equivocal diagnosis where advanced appendicitis is deemed less likely a correct diagnosis is more important than a rapid diagnosis. These patients can safely be managed by active observation with an improved diagnostic work-up under observation, which has consistently shown a low proportion of negative appendectomies without an increase in the proportion of perforations or morbidity. A high proportion of perforations can be explained by selection due to undiagnosed resolving appendicitis. The proportion of perforation is therefore a questionable measure of the quality of the management of patients with suspected appendicitis and should be used with caution.

Appendectomy↗