Despite the partly marginal advantages and a limited clinical rel

Despite the partly marginal advantages and a limited clinical relevance, Sauerland et al. recommended the laparoscopic technique. Especially young, female, obese, and working patients seem to profit from this technique. A further Cochrane review by Guitan [8] (LE 1) has confirmed the recommendation of LA especially for fertile women due to a higher diagnostic value when compared to OA and a lower rate of resection of Selleckchem Eltanexor inconspicuous PD0332991 appendices, although the rate of adverse events has not been reduced. All the

advantages of LA versus OA has also been confirmed also by a recent meta-analysis of 25 studies including 2,220 LAs and 2,474 OA, especially concerned less postoperative complications and pain, an earlier return to food intake, a shorter hospital stay, and an earlier return to work and normal activity. Another interesting point reported in this analysis is that hospital-related costs were not differ significantly between the two procedures, although the LA surgical time was

significantly longer LY2109761 [9] (LE I). The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery recommends LA in their evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of suspected acute appendicitis due to a significantly lower rate of wound infections and quicker postoperative recovery [10]. The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, too, recommends LA in different patient collectives [11]. Two further Italians guidelines [12, 13] on the same topic recommend the laparoscopic approach in both uncomplicated

as complicated appendicitis, but above all in both these guidelines has been stressed the idea of laparoscopy as a final diagnostic and formal therapeutic act (LE I). It is also well pointed out the idea that, has previously reported in the EAES guidelines [10], the converted cases have similar outcome when compared to primarily open cases (LE II). Besides fertile women, groups at major selleck screening library risk of complications, such as elderly and obese patients, would benefit most from a laparoscopic approach [14–24] (LE III). It is interesting to notice that about this two groups of patients – elderly and obese – have beer recently published two papers were the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database has been used. In the one by Mason et al. [25], 13330 obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30) who underwent an appendectomy (78% LA, 22% OA) during the period 2005–2009, have been identified and their short-term outcomes has been analysed, using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. The Conclusions of the Authors is that the analysis of the NSQIP database showed that the LA is superior to the OA in obese patients and that a considerably greater risk of complications is associated with the open technique; most of the morbidity is due to wound-related issues that become more prevalent in the open approach with increasing obesity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>