Search

Although laparoscopic appendectomy is becoming the procedure of choice over open appendectomy in the treatment of appendicitis, its role in the elderly has not been widely studied. The objective of this study was to compare the 30-day outcomes after laparoscopic versus open for appendicitis in the elderly patients.Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS/NSQIP) databases for years 2005–2009, 3,674 patients (age >65 years) who underwent an appendectomy for appendicitis were identified. Seventy-two percent of the procedures were performed laparoscopically. In addition to aggregate cohort analysis, propensity score 1:1 matching was used to minimize the treatment selection bias. The association between surgical approach and morbidity, mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed.In the aggregate cohort analysis, patients who underwent an open appendectomy had a higher rate of minor morbidity (9.3% vs. 4.5%; p< 0.001), overall morbidity (13.4% vs. 8.2%, p< 0.001), and mortality (2% vs. 0.9%, p= 0.003). However, in the matched cohort analysis, open appendectomy was only associated with a higher rate of minor morbidity (9.3% vs. 5.7%; p= 0.002) and overall morbidity (13.4% vs. 10.1%; p= 0.02) but similar mortality rates (2% vs. 1.5%; p= 0.313). In matched cohort analysis, open appendectomy also was associated with a higher rate of superficial surgical site infection (SSI) (3.8% vs. 1.4%; p< 0.001) and a lower rate of organ/space SSI (1.3% vs. 2.9%; p= 0.009). Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter LOS in both aggregate and matched cohorts compared with open appendectomy (p< 0.001).Within ACS NSQIP hospitals, elderly patients benefited from a laparoscopic approach to appendicitis with regards to a shorter LOS and a lower minor and overall morbidity. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with lower superficial SSI and higher organ/space SSI rates.

Abstract: Background: The clinical outcomes for patients randomized to either open or laparoscopic appendectomy are comparable. However, it is not known whether this is true in the subset of the adult population with higher body mass indexes (BMIs). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in the obese population. Methods: A subgroup analysis of a randomized, prospective, double-blind study was conducted at a county academic medical center. Of the 217 randomized patients, 37 had a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or higher. Open surgery was performed for 14 and laparoscopic surgery for 23 of these patients. The primary outcome measures were the postoperative complication rates. The secondary outcomes were operative time, length of hospital stay, time to resumption of diet, narcotic requirements, and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36) quality-of-life data. Results: No differences in complications between the open and laparoscopic groups were found. Also, no significant differences were seen in any of the secondary outcomes except for a longer operative time among the obese patients. Conclusions: In this study, laparoscopic appendectomy did not show a benefit over the open approach for obese patients with appendicitis.

Abstract: Background: The classic method of mesh fixation in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is transfascial sutures with tacks. This method has been associated with low recurrence rates, but yields significant morbidity from pain and bleeding. Fibrin glue has been used successfully in inguinal hernia repair with decreased incidence of chronic pain without an increase in recurrence rates, but its utility for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is unknown. Our aim is to evaluate the efficacy of fibrin glue for laparoscopic mesh fixation to the anterior abdominal wall compared with other fixation methods. Methods: Four different laparoscopic mesh fixation methods were randomly assigned to midline positions along the abdominal wall of 12 female pigs and compared: (1) fibrin glue only (GO), (2) transfascial sutures with tacks (ST), (3) fibrin glue with tacks (GT), and (4) tacks only (TO). At 4 weeks post implantation, tensile strength, adhesions, migration, contraction, and buckling/folding were assessed using Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis by ranks test. Results: There were no significant differences in tensile strength, adhesions or buckling/folding among the four fixation methods. A significant increase in mean migration (3.3 vs. 0.0 mm, p = 0.03) and percentage contraction (28% vs. 14%, p = 0.02) were identified in the GO group when compared with ST (see Table 3). Conclusions: Mesh fixation using fibrin glue has comparable tensile strength and adhesion rate to sutures with tacks in the swine model. Increased contraction and migration rates associated with fibrin glue alone may be an issue and warrants further study. On the other hand, the GT group showed similar biomechanical characteristics to the other groups and may represent a reasonable alternative to the use of transfascial sutures.

Abstract: Background: An important aspect of a new surgical technique is whether it can be performed by other surgeons in other institutions. The authors report the first 297 cases in a multi-institutional and multinational review of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed via a single portal of entry. Methods: Data were collected retrospectively for the initial patients undergoing single-port cholecystectomy by 13 surgeons who performed these procedures in their institutions after training by the authors. The review included operative time, blood loss, incision length, length of hospital stay (LOS), necessary additional trocars, and other parameters important to cholecystectomy. A database of all the single-port-access (SPA) surgeries performed by the surgeons included demographic and procedural details, LOS, complications, and initial follow-up data. Results: To date, 297 single-port cholecystectomies have been performed for a variety of diagnoses, primarily cholelithiasis. The average operative time was 71 min, and the average LOS was 1–2 days. The average blood loss was minimal. The use of additional port sites outside the umbilicus occurred in 34 of the cases. Of the 35 intraoperative cholangiograms performed, 34 were successful. No significant complications occurred except for seromas and minor postoperative wound infections. These results are comparable with those for standard multiport cholecystectomy. In addition, no access site hernias (ASH) occurred. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate that SPA surgery is an alternative to multiport laparoscopy with fewer scars and better cosmesis. One factor affecting the rate for adoption of SPA surgery among other surgeons is the reproducibility of this new procedure. Although this study had insufficient data to determine fully the benefits of SPA surgery, the feasibility of this procedure with safe, acceptable results was demonstrated in this initial large series across multinational institutions.

Abstract: Introduction: Super-morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) present unique technical challenges. In our experience the ease of the operation and the operative time seem to be more dependent on body habitus than body mass index (BMI). We hypothesized that the distance between the xyphoid process and the umbilicus (the XU distance) correlated with surgical difficulty and described an original modification of trocar placement based on this measurement to improve the ease of the operation. Methods: Seven hundred and seventy-four patients underwent LRYGB, and the XU distance was measured in a subset of 38 patients midway through the experience. The need for additional trocars was assessed intraoperatively and the relationship between the XU distance and the need for extra trocars was subsequently analyzed. A standardized approach for trocar placement was implemented in the second half of our series. The operative time was compared between the standardized and nonstandardized groups. Results: Fifty percent of the patients required a five-trocar technique. Median XU distance in this group was 21.4 cm (range 17–25 cm). In the remaining 19 patients additional trocars were added; median XU distance was 27.3 cm (range 24–33 cm). From the 774 patients included in the study period, the operative time for the first 322 patients who were completed with a nonstandardized trocar approach was significantly longer than the subsequent 452 cases in which the standardized trocar approach was used (210 versus 173 min, p < 0.001). Conclusions: We define XU distance as the key element in determining the choice of trocar placement. When XU distance is less then 25 cm, the basic approach should be used and if it is greater than 25 cm, the advanced trocar approach is recommended. This standardized technique leads to decreased operative time and improved ease of operation.