Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery ; : 37-43, 2014.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-131188

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure for treatment of appendicitis. However, in some complicated cases, like periappendiceal abscess, deciding on treatment options is very challenging. Early appendectomy or interval appendectomy may be possible, but remains controversial. METHODS: We prospectively studied the advantages of interval appendectomy in 21 patients with periappendiceal abscess using a laparoscopic method versus 14 patients with immediate initial laparotomy. RESULTS: In the interval appendectomy group (INT group), in periappendiceal abscess, use of a laparoscopic method was advantageous in terms of operation time (p<0.001), less fasting time (p<0.001), and fewer postoperative complications (p=0.032). However, the total cost in the INT group was 1,686,000+/-940,000 South Korean won (KRW) compared with 1,506,000+/-322,000 KRW in the early appendectomy group (EAR group) (p=0.007) because patients in the INT group required two hospital visits. The total length of hospital stay postoperatively, was 7.31+/-2.726 days in the INT group, compared with 9.21+/-3.378 days in the EAR group (p=0.537). CONCLUSION: We recommend interval appendectomy as the preferable approach for the periappendiceal abscess, as it can result in more favorable postoperative surgical outcomes, fewer complications, and less antibiotic usage.


Subject(s)
Humans , Abscess , Appendectomy , Appendicitis , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Ear , Fasting , Laparotomy , Length of Stay , Postoperative Complications , Prospective Studies
2.
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery ; : 37-43, 2014.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-131185

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure for treatment of appendicitis. However, in some complicated cases, like periappendiceal abscess, deciding on treatment options is very challenging. Early appendectomy or interval appendectomy may be possible, but remains controversial. METHODS: We prospectively studied the advantages of interval appendectomy in 21 patients with periappendiceal abscess using a laparoscopic method versus 14 patients with immediate initial laparotomy. RESULTS: In the interval appendectomy group (INT group), in periappendiceal abscess, use of a laparoscopic method was advantageous in terms of operation time (p<0.001), less fasting time (p<0.001), and fewer postoperative complications (p=0.032). However, the total cost in the INT group was 1,686,000+/-940,000 South Korean won (KRW) compared with 1,506,000+/-322,000 KRW in the early appendectomy group (EAR group) (p=0.007) because patients in the INT group required two hospital visits. The total length of hospital stay postoperatively, was 7.31+/-2.726 days in the INT group, compared with 9.21+/-3.378 days in the EAR group (p=0.537). CONCLUSION: We recommend interval appendectomy as the preferable approach for the periappendiceal abscess, as it can result in more favorable postoperative surgical outcomes, fewer complications, and less antibiotic usage.


Subject(s)
Humans , Abscess , Appendectomy , Appendicitis , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Ear , Fasting , Laparotomy , Length of Stay , Postoperative Complications , Prospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL