Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409584›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2021

Is the use of endoloops safe and efficient for the closure of the appendicular stump in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis?

Virginia Durán Muñoz-Cruzado, Gregorio Anguiano-Diaz, Luis Tallón Aguilar, José Tinoco González, Alejandro Sánchez Arteaga, Daniel Aparicio Sánchez, Felipe Pareja Ciuró, Javier Padillo Ruiz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Laparoscopic appendectomy, stump closure and endoloops: A meta-analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Virginia Durán Muñoz-CruzadoDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Gregorio Anguiano-DiazDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Luis Tallón AguilarDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
José Tinoco GonzálezDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Alejandro Sánchez ArteagaDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Daniel Aparicio SánchezDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Felipe Pareja CiuróDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain. cirugiaurgenciasHUVR@gmail.com.
Javier Padillo RuizDivision of General Surgery, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, Av Manuel Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is still controversy regarding the ideal technique to close the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficiency of the use of an endoloop (EL) and endostapler (ES) in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

methodsRetrospective cohort study of patients undergoing LA from February 2013 to December 2019. Acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis were analysed separately, establishing two groups according to the stump closure technique: EL or ES. Seven hundred-nine patients were included (535 uncomplicated and 174 complicated). In uncomplicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 447 of the patients (83.55%) and an ES was used in 88 patients (16.45%). In complicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 85 patients (48.85%) and an ES was used in 89 patients (51.15%). An analysis of effectiveness and a cost analysis of each technique were performed.

resultsIn uncomplicated appendicitis, we found no differences with respect to global complications, although there were significant differences in the total mean hospital stay (EL group 1.55 (SD 1.48) days; ES group 2.21 (SD 1.69) days; p = 0.046). This meant a savings of 514.12€ per patient using the EL p < 0.001). In complicated appendicitis, the reoperations classified as Clavien-Dindo IIIB in the EL group (6.4%) were greater than in the ES group (0%) (p = 0.012), although the rate of postoperative abscesses (p = 0.788) and the mean volume of abscesses (p = 0.891) were similar.

conclusionThe systematic use of an EL could reduce costs in uncomplicated appendicitis, while in complicated cases, both options are valid. Prospective studies with a greater number of patients are needed to observe differences in postoperative complications.

Indexed as

AppendicitisLaparoscopyAppendectomyHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesAppendectomyAppendicitisEfficiencyLaparoscopyoperativePostoperative complicationsSurgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID33409584
OpenAlexW3119609783

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.