Cargando…

Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is most commonly performed using two 5-mm and one 10/12-mm ports. Various attempts to reduce the number and size of ports have been made and new technologies such as single port LA have been introduced. Appendix and mesoappendix are usually divided with a s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Bonatti, Hugo J. R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6545795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31236293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9761968
_version_ 1783423448201035776
author Bonatti, Hugo J. R.
author_facet Bonatti, Hugo J. R.
author_sort Bonatti, Hugo J. R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is most commonly performed using two 5-mm and one 10/12-mm ports. Various attempts to reduce the number and size of ports have been made and new technologies such as single port LA have been introduced. Appendix and mesoappendix are usually divided with a stapler or energy device with electrocautery, clips, and endoloop being cheaper options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study includes 51 consecutive LAs performed at a rural hospital. Patients were divided into 4 groups: group 1 was the standard technique group (n=12), group 2 served as a “try-out” (n=12), group 3 served as feasibility group (n=12), and group 4 was the final patient cohort in which the optimized technique was preferably used (n=15). RESULTS: Median age of the study cohort was 35.4 (range: 6.2-80.6) years, and 55% of patients were male. Whereas in G1 all patients had standard port placement (10/12-mm, 2x5-mm), in an increasing number of patients in G2-4 only two 5-mm ports and the 2.3-mm Teleflex minigrasper were inserted. Usage of staplers and/or energy devices was reduced from 100% in G1 to 20% in G4, and in the majority of cases both the appendix and the vascular pedicle were secured with an endoloop. The new technique did not add time to the procedure or total OR time. No stump-leaks or surgical site infections were encountered in this series, and there were no conversions to open surgery. Cost savings when not using a stapler or energy device are approximately 400$ per case; the minigrasper added approximately 200$ to the case. DISCUSSION: LA with use of two ports and a portless needle grasper is feasible in the majority of cases and was associated with high patient satisfaction and excellent cosmetic results. Avoiding energy devices and staplers is cost saving; the endoloop securely controls appendix and mesoappendix.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6545795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65457952019-06-24 Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital Bonatti, Hugo J. R. Minim Invasive Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is most commonly performed using two 5-mm and one 10/12-mm ports. Various attempts to reduce the number and size of ports have been made and new technologies such as single port LA have been introduced. Appendix and mesoappendix are usually divided with a stapler or energy device with electrocautery, clips, and endoloop being cheaper options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study includes 51 consecutive LAs performed at a rural hospital. Patients were divided into 4 groups: group 1 was the standard technique group (n=12), group 2 served as a “try-out” (n=12), group 3 served as feasibility group (n=12), and group 4 was the final patient cohort in which the optimized technique was preferably used (n=15). RESULTS: Median age of the study cohort was 35.4 (range: 6.2-80.6) years, and 55% of patients were male. Whereas in G1 all patients had standard port placement (10/12-mm, 2x5-mm), in an increasing number of patients in G2-4 only two 5-mm ports and the 2.3-mm Teleflex minigrasper were inserted. Usage of staplers and/or energy devices was reduced from 100% in G1 to 20% in G4, and in the majority of cases both the appendix and the vascular pedicle were secured with an endoloop. The new technique did not add time to the procedure or total OR time. No stump-leaks or surgical site infections were encountered in this series, and there were no conversions to open surgery. Cost savings when not using a stapler or energy device are approximately 400$ per case; the minigrasper added approximately 200$ to the case. DISCUSSION: LA with use of two ports and a portless needle grasper is feasible in the majority of cases and was associated with high patient satisfaction and excellent cosmetic results. Avoiding energy devices and staplers is cost saving; the endoloop securely controls appendix and mesoappendix. Hindawi 2019-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6545795/ /pubmed/31236293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9761968 Text en Copyright © 2019 Hugo J. R. Bonatti. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bonatti, Hugo J. R.
Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title_full Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title_fullStr Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title_full_unstemmed Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title_short Development of a Two Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy Technique at a Rural Hospital
title_sort development of a two port laparoscopic appendectomy technique at a rural hospital
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6545795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31236293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9761968
work_keys_str_mv AT bonattihugojr developmentofatwoportlaparoscopicappendectomytechniqueataruralhospital