-
World journal of surgery · May 1994
Comparative Study Clinical TrialProspective nonrandomized study of conventional versus laparoscopic appendectomy.
- O Reiertsen, E Trondsen, A Bakka, O K Andersen, S Larsen, and A R Rosseland.
- Department of Surgery, Akershus Central Hospital, Nordbyhagen, Norway.
- World J Surg. 1994 May 1; 18 (3): 411-5; discussion 415-6.
AbstractWith the introduction of laparoscopic appendectomy a prospective study was started. Patients with suspected appendicitis were selected for conventional appendectomy or laparoscopy according to the preference of the surgeon on call. During a 1-year period 233 patients were included, of whom 97 underwent conventional appendectomy and 136 laparoscopy. Among the patients selected to laparoscopy, laparoscopic appendectomy was carried out in 72 cases, conventional appendectomy in 32, and only diagnostic laparoscopy in the remaining 32. Removal of a normal appendix was significantly more common in the group of patients directly selected for conventional appendectomy compared to laparoscopy (p < 0.01). The duration of the operation was shorter (p < 0.05) and the postoperative hospital stay and the convalescence longer (p < 0.05) with conventional than with laparoscopic appendectomy. Peroperative problems and minor postoperative complications were more common (p < 0.01) with laparoscopic than conventional appendectomy. However, the clinical impact of these problems were limited. The difference between the procedures regarding major complications was not significant. Laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be at least as good as conventional appendectomy. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to decide which of the procedures to recommend.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.