ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Impact of fellowship training on surgical outcomes after appendectomies: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic revision of open appendectomy complicated by high-output colo-cutaneous fistula: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Why do not we talk about MIS fellowship? A short review of the short literature.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Review
- Disparities in Access to Thoracic Surgeons among Patients Receiving Lung Lobectomy in the United States.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- The National Provider Identifier Taxonomy: Does it Align With a Surgeon's Actual Clinical Practice?The Journal of surgical research · 2023Article
- Breast surgery super-specialization: Impact on advanced surgical training and research.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesReview
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
backgroundOutcome studies have failed to show significant improvement related to formal fellowship training in different surgical specialties. We aimed to look whether laparoscopic fellowship-trained (FT) surgeons had better outcomes.
methodsThis is an IRB approved retrospective review from a single institution (inner city hospital) on adults undergoing appendectomy from 2008 to 2017. Demographics and 30-day complications were analyzed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.
resultsTotal of 558 appendectomies were reviewed. 151 (27.36%) appendectomies were performed by FT surgeons (MIS/CRS), 401 (72.64%) performed by GS. No difference in age, ASA, BMI, race, gender, insurance status, smoking, diabetes mellitus (DM), or hypertension was found. Also, similar rates of non-iatrogenic perforated appendicitis were seen (16.37% GS vs 20% FT, p = 0.318). For major complications, no difference was found between GS and FT (p = 0.63). However, appendectomies performed by GS showed higher rates of post-op ileus (3.99% vs 0.66%, p = 0.04), higher conversion to open (7.55% vs 2.67%, p = 0.039), higher rates of choosing an open approach (17.46% vs 0.66%, p = < 0.001), and longer length of stay (LOS) (median 1.9 vs 1.8 days p = 0.048). Of the 16 patients with ileus from the GS group three were open, two converted to open, and eleven laparoscopic with mean OR time of 70 min and LOS of 13.3 days. The only laparoscopic case from the FT group with ileus had a mean operative time of 56 min and LOS of 15 days. On multivariate regression analysis, only DM was found as risk factor for major complications (OR 3.01, 95% CI 1.307-6.92, p = 0.01), while laparoscopic approach was seen as protective factor against major complications (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.97, p = 0.04).
conclusionLaparoscopic fellowship training had a positive outcome on post-op ileus and LOS after appendectomy. This seems to be related to the higher prevalence of choosing laparoscopic technique and lower rate of conversion to open.
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.