ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2009
[Open appendectomy. When do we still need it?].
Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Interdisciplinary surgical spectrum in cooperation of abdominal surgery and gynecology : What must the (general/abdominal) surgeon know?]Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Is the use of endoloops safe and efficient for the closure of the appendicular stump in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Article
- [Appendectomy in surgical residency. What has changed over the past 10 years?].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic-assisted single-port appendectomy in children: it is a safe and cost-effective alternative to conventional laparoscopic techniques?Minimally invasive surgery · 2013Article
- Cost-effectiveness of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy: a multilevel approach with propensity score matching.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2012Article
- Trend, variability, and outcome of open vs. laparoscopic appendectomy based on a large administrative database.Surgical endoscopy · 2012Article
- Review
- [Pediatric appendicitis : Open or laparoscopic appendicectomy in a specialized visceral surgical clinic?].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2011Article
- Unexpected findings on laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis: a pro for laparoscopic appendectomy as the standard procedure for acute appendicitis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2010Article
- Laparoscopic appendectomy using a single polymeric clip to close the appendicular stump.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute appendicitis is the most common emergency visceral surgical procedure in Germany with 130,000 appendectomies. The question of which operational procedure should be used must therefore be discussed at regular intervals. In many centers of minimal invasive surgery, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the standard procedure. Nearly 30 years after introduction of LA, it is believed that open appendectomy (OA) is needed only on rare occasions, but the actual percentage of OAs carried out in 2006 was 46% of all appendectomies. This high percentage documents that OA is still the standard procedure in many German hospitals. A review of the literature shows that there are still some situations in which OA is superior to LA. Infants younger than 5 years old have a more difficult basic requirement for LA due to the small abdominal cavity, therefore OA is the procedure of choice in most cases. During pregnancy OA has a lower risk for the fetus than LA. Cost analyses show that OA is less expensive for the hospital in material costs, whereas LA is the better economic choice due to an earlier return to work. In summary, there are only marginal differences between the two procedures since both offer a fast patient recovery. Advantages in favor of both LA and OA exist in subgroup analyses and the possible subgroups that can benefit from OA are discussed in this article.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.