Evaluation Of Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy In Terms Of Recovery Time, Complications, And Hospital Stay: A Cross-Sectional Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63682/jns.v14i32S.8400Keywords:
Appendicitis, Laparoscopic appendectomy, Open appendectomy, Recovery time, Complications, Hospital stayAbstract
Background: Appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies worldwide. While open appendectomy (OA) has been the gold standard treatment for over a century, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has gained popularity in recent decades. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in terms of recovery time, postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of General Surgery, KAHER's J.G.M. Medical College, Hubballi, from January 2023 to December 2023. A total of 120 patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups: 60 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA group) and 60 underwent open appendectomy (OA group). Demographic data, operative time, postoperative pain scores, analgesic requirements, time to oral intake, complications, length of hospital stay, and time to return to normal activities were recorded and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 25.0.
Results: Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic characteristics and severity of appendicitis. The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LA group (58.35 ± 12.42 minutes) compared to the OA group (42.18 ± 9.75 minutes) (p<0.001). However, the LA group demonstrated significantly reduced postoperative pain scores (Visual Analog Scale scores of 3.2 ± 1.1 vs. 5.4 ± 1.3, p<0.001), lower analgesic requirements (1.2 ± 0.5 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7 doses, p<0.001), shorter time to oral intake (14.6 ± 4.3 vs. 21.8 ± 6.2 hours, p<0.001), reduced wound infection rates (3.3% vs. 15%, p=0.026), shorter hospital stay (2.1 ± 0.8 vs. 4.2 ± 1.4 days, p<0.001), and earlier return to normal activities (12.3 ± 3.2 vs. 18.7 ± 4.6 days, p<0.001).
Conclusion: Despite longer operative times, laparoscopic appendectomy offers significant advantages over open appendectomy in terms of reduced postoperative pain, lower analgesic requirements, decreased wound infection rates, shorter hospital stay, and quicker return to normal activities. These findings support the use of laparoscopic appendectomy as the preferred approach for the management of acute appendicitis
Downloads
Metrics
References
Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, Tauxe RV. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132(5):910-925.
McBurney C. The incision made in the abdominal wall in cases of appendicitis, with a description of a new method of operating. Ann Surg. 1894;20(1):38-43.
Semm K. Endoscopic appendectomy. Endoscopy. 1983;15(2):59-64.
Chung RS, Rowland DY, Li P, Diaz J. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy. Am J Surg. 1999;177(3):250-256.
Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(10):CD001546.
Markar SR, Venkat-Raman V, Ho A, Karthikesalingam A, Kinross J, Evans J, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in obese patients: a meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2011;9(6):451-455.
Tiwari MM, Reynoso JF, Tsang AW, Oleynikov D. Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy in management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Ann Surg. 2011;254(6):927-932.
Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(10):CD001546.
Wei B, Qi CL, Chen TF, Zheng ZH, Huang JL, Hu BG, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a metaanalysis. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(4):1199-1208.
Vettoretto N, Gobbi S, Corradi A, Belli F, Piccolo D, Pernazza G, et al. Consensus conference on laparoscopic appendectomy: development of guidelines. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13(7):748-754.
De Simone B, Chouillard E, Di Saverio S, Pagani L, Sartelli M, Biffl WL, et al. Emergency surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: what you need to know for practice. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2020;102(5):323-332.
Ferris M, Quan S, Kaplan BS, Molodecky N, Ball CG, Chernoff GW, et al. The global incidence of appendicitis: a systematic review of population-based studies. Ann Surg. 2017;266(2):237-241.
Mehrabi A, Hafezi M, Arvin J, Esmaeilzadeh M, Garoussi C, Emami G, et al. A comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12(8):1417-1422.
Jaschinski T, Mosch C, Eikermann M, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in patients with suspected appendicitis: a systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015;15:48.
Masoomi H, Nguyen NT, Dolich MO, Mills S, Carmichael JC, Stamos MJ. Laparoscopic appendectomy trends and outcomes in the United States: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2004-2011. Am Surg. 2014;80(10):1074-1077.
Li X, Zhang J, Sang L, Zhang W, Chu Z, Li X, et al. Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy - a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010;10:129.
Markides G, Subar D, Riyad K. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults with complicated appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2010;34(9):2026-2040.
Katkhouda N, Mason RJ, Towfigh S, Gevorgyan A, Essani R. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Ann Surg. 2005;242(3):439-448.
Swank HA, Eshuis EJ, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Bemelman WA. Short- and long-term results of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy. World J Surg. 2011;35(6):1221-1226.
Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Arimoto Y, Nishiguchi Y, Maeda K, Hirakawa K. Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(10):1929-1939.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
