Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18224478›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2008

A critical analysis of laparoscopic appendectomy: how experience with 1,400 appendectomies allowed innovative treatment to become standard in a university hospital.

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

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Late caecal fistula after laparoscopic appendectomy managed mini-invasively - case report.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2011
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Open appendectomy. When do we still need it?].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2009
    Review
  11. Trends in splenectomy: where does laparoscopy stand?JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kerstin S SchickDepartment of Surgery, University of Munich-Grosshadern, Marchioninistr. 15, D-81377, Munich, Germany. kerstin.schick@med.uni-muenchen.de
Thomas P Hüttl
Jan M Fertmann
Hans-Martin Hornung
Karl-Walter Jauch
Johannes N Hoffmann
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough 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.

methodsConsecutive 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.

resultsAfter 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).

conclusionsThis 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.

Indexed as

AppendectomyLaparoscopyAppendicitisHospitals, UniversityHumans

Identifiers

PMID18224478
OpenAlexW2084354511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.