Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18756599›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2008

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: which way to go?

Ioannis Kehagias, Stavros Nikolaos Karamanakos, Spyros Panagiotopoulos, Konstantinos Panagopoulos, Fotis Kalfarentzos

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparison of primary outcome measures.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
    Trial
  10. Article
  11. A clinical comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for the treatment of complicated appendicitis: historical cohort study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2020
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ioannis KehagiasDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Patras, Rion University Hospital, Patras, Greece. stkarama@yahoo.gr
Stavros Nikolaos Karamanakos
Spyros Panagiotopoulos
Konstantinos Panagopoulos
Fotis Kalfarentzos
General University Hospital of Patras · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare the outcome of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

methodsProspectively collected data from 293 consecutive patients with acute appendicitis were studied. These comprised of 165 patients who underwent conventional appendectomy and 128 patients treated laparoscopically. The two groups were compared with respect to operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rate and cost.

resultsThere were no statistical differences regarding patient characteristics between the two groups. Conversion to laparotomy was necessary in 2 patients (1.5%). Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter hospital stay (2.2 d vs 3.1 d, P = 0.04), and lower incidence of wound infection (5.3% vs 12.8%, P = 0.03). However, in patients with complicated disease, intra-abdominal abscess formation was more common after laparoscopic appendectomy (5.3% vs 2.1%, P = 0.002). The operative time and analgesia requirements were similar in the two groups. The cost of treatment was higher by 370 EUR in the laparoscopic group.

conclusionLaparoscopic appendectomy is as safe and efficient as open appendectomy, provided surgical experience and equipment are available.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdultAnalgesicsAppendectomyAppendicitisCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHospital CostsHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionPostoperative PainProspective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID18756599
PMCPMC2739944
OpenAlexW2069688555

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.