Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorÇiftçi, Fatih
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-03T21:08:18Z
dc.date.available2019-01-03T21:08:18Z
dc.date.issued2015-10-27
dc.identifier.issn1948-9366
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11363/787
dc.description.abstractAIM: To compare laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy in light of recent data at our centre. METHODS: The data of patients who underwent appendectomy between January 2011 and June 2013 were collected. The data included patients' demographic data, procedure time, length of hospital stay, the need for pain medicine, postoperative visual analog scale of pain, and morbidities. Pregnant women and patients with previous lower abdominal surgery were excluded. Patients with surgery converted from laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) to mini-incision open appendectomy (MOA) were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups: LA and MOA done by the same surgeon. The patients were randomized into MOA and LA groups a computer-generated number. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made by the surgeon with physical examination, laboratory values, and radiological tests (abdominal ultrasound or computed tomography). All operations were performed with general anaesthesia. The postoperative vision analog scale score was recorded at postoperative hours 1, 6, 12, and 24. Patients were discharged when they tolerated normal food and passed gas and were followed up every week for three weeks as outpatients. RESULTS: Of the 243 patients, 121 (49.9%) under-went MOA, while 122 (50.1%) had laparoscopic appendectomy. There were no significant differences in operation time between the two groups (P = 0.844), whereas the visual analog scale of pain was significantly higher in the open appendectomy group at the 1st hour (P = 0.001), 6th hour (P = 0.001), and 12th hour (P = 0.027). The need for analgesic medication was significantly higher in the MOA group (P = 0.001). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of morbidity rate (P = 0.599). The rate of total complications was similar between the two groups (6.5% in LA vs 7.4% in OA, P = 0.599). All wound infections were treated non-surgically. Six out of seven patients with pelvic abscess were successfully treated with percutaneous drainage; one patient required surgical drainage after a failed percutaneous drainage. There were no differences in the period of hospital stay, operation time, and postoperative complication rate between the two groups. Laparoscopic appendectomy decreases the need for analgesic medications and the visual analog scale of pain. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic appendectomy should be considered as a standard treatment for acute appendicitis. Mini-incision appendectomy is an alternative for a select group of patients.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipGeneral Surgery Department Safa Hospital, Istanbul, Turkeyen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC, 8226 REGENCY DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 USAen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.4240/wjgs.v7.i10.267en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectResearch Subject Categories::MEDICINE::Surgeryen_US
dc.titleLaparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalWorld Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgeryen_US
dc.contributor.departmentİstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesien_US
dc.identifier.volume7en_US
dc.identifier.issue10en_US
dc.identifier.startpage267en_US
dc.identifier.endpage272en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKategori Yoken_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess