Laparoscopic appendectomy: is it worth it?

Abstract

Data on all laparoscopic appendectomies (LA) were collected prospectively from June 1990 through July 1992 and compared retrospectively with all open appendectomies (OA) done at the same hospital during the same time period. Laparoscopic appendectomies were performed in 29 patients (ages 15-47, mean 25.3 years) and OA in 77 patients (ages 18-71, mean 31.9 years, P < 0.01). Preoperative findings were similar in the two groups. Acute appendicitis was confirmed in 22 (76%) LA and in 57 (74%) OA; of these, 9/22 (41%) LA and 23/57 (40%) OA were gangrenous or perforated. A normal appendix was removed in seven (24%) LA and in 20 (26%) OA. Three patients (10%) required conversion of LA to an open procedure. Operative time was significantly longer for LA (mean 105 minutes) compared with OA (mean 69 minutes; P < 0.001). Postoperative complications requiring further intervention (wound infection or intraabdominal abscess) occurred in three LA (10%) and in 23 OA (30%, P < 0.05). Wound morbidity as measured by number of wounds left open at surgery or opened for infection was significantly less after LA (14% LA, 39% OA, P < 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly shorter after LA (mean 4.2 days) compared with OA (mean 6.3 days; P < 0.05). Hospital charges and professional fees were not significantly different between the two groups. In selected patients, LA is a safe, effective alternative to OA, with fewer complications and shorter hospital stay. In addition, hospital charges are similar, making an investment of more time in the operating yield an outcome equal or superior to OA.