Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgery 7/2008

01.07.2008

A Critical Analysis of Laparoscopic Appendectomy: How Experience with 1,400 Appendectomies Allowed Innovative Treatment to Become Standard in a University Hospital

verfasst von: Kerstin S. Schick, Thomas P. Hüttl, Jan M. Fertmann, Hans-Martin Hornung, Karl-Walter Jauch, Johannes N. Hoffmann

Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgery | Ausgabe 7/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Although advantages of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) have not yet been proved, there is increasing evidence that LA provides diagnostic and therapeutic advantages as compared to conventional surgery. This article reports the introduction of LA in a university hospital where LA now represents the standard operative procedure in patients with suspected appendicitis.

Methods

Consecutive patients with appendectomy were prospectively included in the surgical database from 5/1991 to 10/2005. Operating time skin-to-skin in minutes, conversion from laparoscopy to open appendectomy, and complications requiring reoperation as well as surgical expertise were recorded.

Results

After initial performance of LA by four experienced specialists in laparoscopic surgery between 1991 and 1994, LA was routinely implemented from 1995 to 2005. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 1,012 patients, and conventional appendectomy in 449 patients, with a LA rate of about 90% in recent years. Intraoperative conversion was deemed necessary in 62 patients (6.2 %) by 40 surgeons among the 103 surgeons who performed LA over 14 years with a mean operative time of 57 ± 2 min. Between 1995 and 2005 about 25%–30% of LAs were performed as the first LA for the respective surgeon. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated overall with a reduced length of stay in the hospital compared to open appendectomy (LA: 4.4 ± 0.1 days versus 6.6 ± 0.2 in open appendectomy; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This analysis provides evidence that LA can be introduced in an university hospital with acceptable results despite low operation numbers per surgeon and a liberal teaching policy. The LA procedure, which is associated with a 2%–4% rate of reoperation, may serve as laparoscopy training for young surgeons.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat McBurney C (1894) The incision made in the abdominal wall in case of appendicitis with a description of a new method of operating. Ann Surg 20:38–4PubMedCrossRef McBurney C (1894) The incision made in the abdominal wall in case of appendicitis with a description of a new method of operating. Ann Surg 20:38–4PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Moberg AC, Berndsen F, Palmquist I, et al. (2005) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for confirmed appendicitis. Br J Surg 92:298–304PubMedCrossRef Moberg AC, Berndsen F, Palmquist I, et al. (2005) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for confirmed appendicitis. Br J Surg 92:298–304PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Kapischke M, Caliebe A, Tepel J, et al. (2006) Open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy: a critical review. Surg Endosc 20:1060–1068PubMedCrossRef Kapischke M, Caliebe A, Tepel J, et al. (2006) Open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy: a critical review. Surg Endosc 20:1060–1068PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Hansen JB, Smithers BM, Schache D, et al. (1996) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: prospective randomized trial. World J Surg 20:17–21PubMedCrossRef Hansen JB, Smithers BM, Schache D, et al. (1996) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: prospective randomized trial. World J Surg 20:17–21PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Reiertsen O, Trondsen E, Bakka A, et al. (1994) Prospective nonrandomized study of conventional versus laparoscopy appendectomy. World J Surg 18:411–416PubMedCrossRef Reiertsen O, Trondsen E, Bakka A, et al. (1994) Prospective nonrandomized study of conventional versus laparoscopy appendectomy. World J Surg 18:411–416PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Cueto J, D’Allemagne B, Vazquez-Frias JA, et al. (2006) Morbidity of laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis: an international study. Surg Endosc 20:717–720PubMedCrossRef Cueto J, D’Allemagne B, Vazquez-Frias JA, et al. (2006) Morbidity of laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis: an international study. Surg Endosc 20:717–720PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Katkhouda N, Mason RJ, Towfigh S, et al. (2005) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Ann Surg 242:439–48; discussion 448–50PubMed Katkhouda N, Mason RJ, Towfigh S, et al. (2005) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Ann Surg 242:439–48; discussion 448–50PubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Slim K, Chipponi J (2006) Laparoscopy for every acute appendicitis? Surg Endosc 20:1785–1786PubMedCrossRef Slim K, Chipponi J (2006) Laparoscopy for every acute appendicitis? Surg Endosc 20:1785–1786PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Horstmann R, Tiwisina C, Classen C, et al. (2005) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: which factors influence the decision between the surgical techniques? Zentralbl Chir 130:48–54PubMedCrossRef Horstmann R, Tiwisina C, Classen C, et al. (2005) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: which factors influence the decision between the surgical techniques? Zentralbl Chir 130:48–54PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Cothren CC, Moore EE, Johnson JL, et al. (2005) Can we afford to do laparoscopic appendectomy in an academic hospital? Am J Surg 190:950–954PubMed Cothren CC, Moore EE, Johnson JL, et al. (2005) Can we afford to do laparoscopic appendectomy in an academic hospital? Am J Surg 190:950–954PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Chung RS, Rowland DY, Li P, et al. (1999) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy. Am J Surg 177:250–256PubMedCrossRef Chung RS, Rowland DY, Li P, et al. (1999) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy. Am J Surg 177:250–256PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Garbutt JM, Soper NJ, Shannon WD, et al. (1999) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 9:17–26PubMedCrossRef Garbutt JM, Soper NJ, Shannon WD, et al. (1999) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 9:17–26PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EA (2004) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD001546 Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EA (2004) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD001546
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Naess F (2005) Laparoscopy and suspected appendicitis. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 125:1820–1821PubMed Naess F (2005) Laparoscopy and suspected appendicitis. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 125:1820–1821PubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kienle P, Buchler MW (2006) Laparoscopic or open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis? Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:668–669PubMedCrossRef Kienle P, Buchler MW (2006) Laparoscopic or open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis? Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:668–669PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Dotzenrath CM, Cupisti K, Raffel A, et al. (2005) Do Germans keep patients too long in hospital? A prospective randomized trial. World J Surg 29:1189–1193PubMedCrossRef Dotzenrath CM, Cupisti K, Raffel A, et al. (2005) Do Germans keep patients too long in hospital? A prospective randomized trial. World J Surg 29:1189–1193PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Eypasch E, Sauerland S, Lefering R, et al. (2002) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: between evidence and common sense. Dig Surg 19:518–522PubMedCrossRef Eypasch E, Sauerland S, Lefering R, et al. (2002) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: between evidence and common sense. Dig Surg 19:518–522PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Sweeney KJ, Dillon M, Johnston SM, et al. (2006) Training in laparoscopic appendectomy. World J Surg 30:358–363PubMedCrossRef Sweeney KJ, Dillon M, Johnston SM, et al. (2006) Training in laparoscopic appendectomy. World J Surg 30:358–363PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Towfigh S, Chen F, Mason R, et al. (2006) Laparoscopic appendectomy significantly reduces length of stay for perforated appendicitis. Surg Endosc 20:495–499PubMedCrossRef Towfigh S, Chen F, Mason R, et al. (2006) Laparoscopic appendectomy significantly reduces length of stay for perforated appendicitis. Surg Endosc 20:495–499PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A Critical Analysis of Laparoscopic Appendectomy: How Experience with 1,400 Appendectomies Allowed Innovative Treatment to Become Standard in a University Hospital
verfasst von
Kerstin S. Schick
Thomas P. Hüttl
Jan M. Fertmann
Hans-Martin Hornung
Karl-Walter Jauch
Johannes N. Hoffmann
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2008
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
World Journal of Surgery / Ausgabe 7/2008
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9429-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2008

World Journal of Surgery 7/2008 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.