Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27582784›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2016

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Antonio Biondi, Carla Di Stefano, Francesco Ferrara, Angelo Bellia, Marco Vacante, Luigi Piazza

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02867072 (Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02867072 phase4completednot on this map

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study Assessing Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CataniaRan2004 to 2011Enrolled593ConditionsAcute AppendicitisArmsOpen appendectomy, Laparoscopic appendectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Rate of Application and Outcome of Non-operative Management of Acute Appendicitis in the Setting of COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

6 authors.

Antonio BiondiDepartment of Surgery, Vittorio Emanuele Hospital, University of Catania, Via Plebiscito, 628, 95124 Catania, Italy.
Carla Di StefanoGeneral and Emergency Surgery Department, Garibaldi Hospital, 95100 Catania, Italy.
Francesco FerraraGeneral and Emergency Surgery Department, Garibaldi Hospital, 95100 Catania, Italy.
Angelo BelliaGeneral and Emergency Surgery Department, Garibaldi Hospital, 95100 Catania, Italy.
Marco VacanteDepartment of Medical and Pediatric Sciences, University of Catania, 95125 Catania, Italy.
Luigi PiazzaGeneral and Emergency Surgery Department, Garibaldi Hospital, 95100 Catania, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAppendectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed in emergency surgery. Because of lack of consensus about the most appropriate technique, appendectomy is still being performed by both open (OA) and laparoscopic (LA) methods. In this retrospective analysis, we aimed to compare the laparoscopic approach and the conventional technique in the treatment of acute appendicitis.

methodsRetrospectively collected data from 593 consecutive patients with acute appendicitis were studied. These comprised 310 patients who underwent conventional appendectomy and 283 patients treated laparoscopically. The two groups were compared for operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rate, return to normal activity and cost.

resultsLaparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter hospital stay (2.7 ± 2.5 days in LA and 1.4 ± 0.6 days in OA), with a less need for analgesia and with a faster return to daily activities (11.5 ± 3.1 days in LA and 16.1 ± 3.3 in OA). Operative time was significantly shorter in the open group (31.36 ± 11.13 min in OA and 54.9 ± 14.2 in LA). Total number of complications was less in the LA group with a significantly lower incidence of wound infection (1.4 % vs 10.6 %, P <0.001). The total cost of treatment was higher by 150 € in the laparoscopic group.

conclusionThe laparoscopic approach is a safe and efficient operative procedure in appendectomy and it provides clinically beneficial advantages over open method (including shorter hospital stay, decreased need for postoperative analgesia, early food tolerance, earlier return to work, lower rate of wound infection) against only marginally higher hospital costs.

trial registrationNCT02867072 Registered 10 August 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

AppendicitisHospital costLaparoscopic appendectomyOpen appendectomy

Identifiers

PMID27582784
PMCPMC5006397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.