Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32926252›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Pregnant patients requiring appendectomy: comparison between open and laparoscopic approaches in NY State.

Abhinay Tumati, Jie Yang, Xiaoyue Zhang, Jared Su, Christine A Ward, Julie Hong, David Garry, Konstantinos Spaniolas, Mark A Talamini, Aurora D Pryor

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Analysis of 190 Female Patients after Appendectomy.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Abhinay TumatiDivision of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA. abhinay.tumati.4@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3255-7236
Jie YangDepartment of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Xiaoyue ZhangDepartment of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Jared Su *Division of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Christine A Ward *Division of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Julie HongDivision of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
David GarryDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Medicine, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Konstantinos SpaniolasDivision of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Mark A TalaminiDivision of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Aurora D PryorDivision of Bariatric, Foregut and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Stony Brook University Hospital · USCornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEven though acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical condition encountered during pregnancy, the preferred approach to appendectomy in pregnant patients remains controversial. Current guidelines support laparoscopic appendectomy as the treatment of choice for pregnant women with appendicitis, regardless of trimester. However, recent published data suggests that the laparoscopic approach contributes to higher rates of fetal demise. Our study aims to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy in pregnancy at a statewide population level.

methodsICD-9 codes were used to extract 1006 pregnant patients undergoing appendectomy between 2005 and 2014 from the NY Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database. Surgical outcomes (any complications, 30-day readmission rate, length of stay (LOS)) and obstetrical outcomes (antepartum hemorrhage, preterm delivery, cesarean section, sepsis, chorioamnionitis) were compared between open and laparoscopic appendectomy. Multivariable generalized linear regression models were used to compare different outcomes between two surgical approaches after adjusting for possible confounders.

resultsThe laparoscopic cohort (n = 547, 54.4%) had significantly shorter LOS than the open group (median ± IQR: 2.00 ± 2.00 days versus 3.00 ± 2.00 days, p value < 0.0001, ratio = 0.789, 95% CI 0.727-0.856). Patients with complicated appendicitis had longer LOS than those with simple appendicitis (p value < 0.0001, ratio = 1.660, 95% CI 1.501-1.835). Obstetrical outcomes (p value = 0.097, OR 1.254, 95% CI 0.961-1.638), 30-day non-delivery readmission (p value = 0.762, OR 1.117, 95% CI 0.538-2.319), and any complications (p value = 0.753, OR 0.924, 95% CI 0.564-1.517) were not statistically significant between the laparoscopic versus open appendectomy groups. Three cases of fetal demise occurred, all within the laparoscopic appendectomy group.

conclusionsThe laparoscopic approach resulted in a shorter LOS. Although fetal demise only occurred in the laparoscopic group, these results were not significant (p value = 0.255). Our large population-based study further supports current guidelines that laparoscopic appendectomy may offer benefits over open surgery for pregnant patients in any trimester due to reduced time in the hospital and fetal and maternal outcomes comparable to open appendectomy.

Indexed as

AppendicitisLaparoscopyAppendectomyCesarean SectionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsPregnancyRetrospective StudiesAppendectomyAppendicitisFetal lossPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID32926252
OpenAlexW3085765386

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.