Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0085693 (acute appendicitis)
 3,606 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

A prospective evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis over a 6-month period is reported. Sixty-five patients with signs and symptoms of appendicitis necessitating surgery were assigned to open (n = 36) or laparoscopic (n = 29) appendicectomy. Thirty-seven patients were female (22 open) and 28 were male (14 open). The median age was 24 (range 14-64) years for open appendicectomy and 18 (range 14-60) years for the laparoscopic procedure. The mean postoperative stay for open operation was 4.8 (range 1-21) days and for the laparoscopic route 2.2 (range 1-11) days (P < 0.05). Inflammation was confirmed histologically in 72 per cent of the open cases and in 74 per cent of the laparoscopic cases (P not significant). The wound infection rate was 11 per cent (n = 4) for open and 4 per cent (n = 1) for laparoscopic appendicectomy (P < 0.05). The median anaesthesia time was 52 (range 15-90) min for open appendicectomy and 48 (range 20-120) min for laparoscopic surgery (P not significant). After open appendicectomy patients had a median of 5 (range 2-12) intramuscular injections of analgesia compared with a median of 1 (range 0-5) in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). Two laparoscopic operations were converted to an open procedure. The results suggest that emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy should be explored further as an alternative to open surgery for acute appendicitis.
 ...
PMID:Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: a prospective evaluation. 844 80

In a prospective controlled study the effect of antibiotics as the only treatment in acute appendicitis was evaluated. Of 40 patients admitted with a duration of abdominal pain of less than 72 h, 20 received antibiotics intravenously for 2 days followed by oral treatment for 8 days and 20 considered as controls were randomized to surgery. All patients treated conservatively were discharged within 2 days, except one who required surgery after 12 h because of peritonitis secondary to perforated appendicitis. Seven patients were readmitted within 1 year as a result of recurrent appendicitis and underwent surgery, when appendicitis was confirmed. The diagnostic accuracy within the operated group was 85 per cent. One patient had perforated appendicitis at operation. Antibiotic treatment in patients with acute appendicitis was as effective as surgery. The patients had less pain and required less analgesia, but the recurrence rate was high.
 ...
PMID:Randomized controlled trial of appendicectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis. 764 84

From October 1990 to October 1992 the first 23 laparoscopically operated patients were recorded. 11 patients retrospectively including a supplementary questioning to missing data, 12 patients prospectively with a follow-up 6-8 weeks later. They were compared with 35 from April 1991 to April 1992 conventionally operated and prospectively observed patients. Laparoscopy was performed on patients with subacute clinical signs. The median age was comparable. Acute appendicitis was histologically confirmed in 18% of the laparoscopically and in 80% of the conventionally operated patients. Operating time was in mean 110 minutes for laparoscopic and 65 minutes for open appendectomy. The postoperative complications for laparoscopy included 4 Douglas abscesses (2 x open and 2 x pararectal revisions), one peritonitis due to a defect Roeder-loop and an haematoma of the abdominal wall. One case of wound infection (3%), one pericoecal abscess which needed an ileoascendostomy and a postoperative fatigue syndrome were recorded for open appendectomy. The postoperative return to normal diet was faster for laparoscopy. Return to normal bowel habits, the need of analgesia and the nominal analogue scales concerning pain, quality of sleep, well-being and appetite showed no obvious differences between the two operation methods. The postoperative stay was on average 6.7 days for laparoscopy and 5.6 days for the open operation. The results show the severe complications which may happen when introducing this new operation method. The laparoscopic appendectomy should only be performed electively in subacute appendicitis or when diagnostic exploration shows an inflamed appendix. Careful rinsing of the operation site and perioperative antibiotic treatment are mandatory. We made good experiences when using a stapler for the removal of the appendix.
 ...
PMID:[Does laparoscopic appendectomy have advantages? Laparoscopic appendectomy in comparison with conventional appendectomy--an observational study during introduction of laparoscopy]. 814 46

The recent experience with open appendectomy was compared to our initial experience with laparoscopic appendectomy. Thirty-eight patients had open appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Two major and four minor complications occurred. Concurrently, 39 patients had laparoscopic appendectomy. There was one major and one minor complication. Of the laparoscopic patients, 69% received less than 24 hours of parenteral postoperative analgesia, compared to 44% of the patients in the open group. Fifteen of 39 laparoscopic patients (38%) were discharged within 24 hours of operation versus 3 of 38 (8%) in the open group. Total mean hospital cost for the laparoscopic group, $7,500, was significantly greater than for the open group, $5,700, because of increased laparoscopic equipment charges. Both open and laparoscopic appendectomy procedures were performed with minimal morbidity. The benefits of laparoscopy were earlier hospital discharge and less parenteral analgesic use, but it was significantly more expensive.
 ...
PMID:Laparoscopic appendectomy, is it worth it? 820 66

A total of 155 consecutive patients with suspected acute appendicitis were studied to compare laparoscopic and conventional operations. Patients were not randomized: laparoscopy was performed when a suitably trained surgeon and laparoscopic instruments were available. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was attempted in 51 patients and was successful in 46 (90 per cent); all conversions to open operation were because of marked inflammatory adhesions around the appendix. There were no intraoperative complications. Reintroduction of normal diet and discharge from hospital occurred earlier after laparoscopic than open surgery (P < 0.05). The requirement for analgesia after successful laparoscopic surgery was less than that after conventional appendicectomy, but the difference was not significant. The incidence of wound infection was reduced after the laparoscopic procedure (P = 0.06). It is concluded that laparoscopic appendicectomy is practical and may have advantages over conventional operation, although a randomized study is necessary.
 ...
PMID:Conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis. 824 23

We retrospectively studied 279 patients who had undergone uncomplicated open appendectomy for acute appendicitis to determine risk factors for postoperative urinary retention. The gender of the patients, the operating time and the amount of fluid given perioperatively had no influence on the occurrence of retention. The amount of analgesic agent administered postoperatively and the age of the patient were significantly associated with urinary retention (p = 0.01 and p < 0.0001, respectively, after adjustment for potential confounding factors). The use of meperidine hydrochloride as compared with morphine and of patient-controlled analgesia as compared with intramuscular delivery were initially found to be significantly related to retention (p = 0.014 and p < 0.0001, respectively). After the effects of the age of the patient, the drug type and the amount of fluid and analgesic agent administered were controlled for, patient-controlled analgesia remained significantly associated with retention (p < 0.0001), whereas the type of drug given was no longer significant after controlling for potential confounding factors. Because we found that urinary retention was 13 times more likely to occur in the patients who had patient-controlled analgesia, we recommend that the use of this form of analgesia delivery be avoided after open appendectomy.
 ...
PMID:Patient-controlled analgesia and postoperative urinary retention after open appendectomy. 834 98

A prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy in patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis was conducted between October 1992 and April 1994. Of the 158 patients randomized, 7 patients were excluded because of protocol violations (conversion to laparotomy in 4, appendix not removed in 3). The 151 patients randomized to either a laparoscopic (n = 79) or an open appendectomy (n = 72) showed no difference in sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) rating, or previous abdominal surgery. The histologic classification of normal, catarrhal, inflamed, suppurative, and gangrenous appendicitis was not different between the two groups. Conversion from laparoscopic to open appendectomy was necessary in seven patients (9%) who had advanced forms of appendiceal inflammation. When compared to open appendectomy the laparoscopic group had a longer median operating time (63 minutes versus 40 minutes), fewer wound infections (2% versus 11%), less requirement for narcotic analgesia, and an earlier return to normal activity (median 7 days versus 14 days). There was no difference in morbidity, and both groups had a median time to discharge of 3 days. Laparoscopic appendectomy is as safe as open appendectomy; and despite the longer operating time, the advantages such as fewer wound infections and earlier return to normal activity make it a worthwhile alternative for patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis.
 ...
PMID:Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: prospective randomized trial. 858 6

A postal questionnaire was sent to all members of the Northern Ireland Society of Anaesthetists to determine current practice in anaesthesia for children with acute appendicitis. Respondents were asked to describe their usual practice in such cases. They were also asked about the occurrence of complications due to the use of suxamethonium, and for their views on the use of rocuronium in such cases. Few major differences in anaesthetic technique were demonstrated. 74% of consultants and 84% of trainees always perform a rapid sequence induction for appendicectomy. However 15% of consultants do not feel that this is necessary. Only 6% of consultants and 6% of trainees would normally use rocuronium, with the majority still preferring suxamethonium. Only 28% of consultants and 20% of trainees see rocuronium as a possible alternative to suxamethonium in these cases, although others expressed increasing concern over the use of suxamethonium in children. There was wide variation in the type of intra-operative and post-operative analgesia prescribed, with less than one third of consultants and trainees using combinations of opioids, local anaesthetics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
 ...
PMID:Anaesthesia for appendicectomy in childhood: a survey of practice in Northern Ireland. 918 88

To study comparative results between laparoscopic and open appendectomy, all the patients with suspected acute appendicitis who presented between January 1992 and December 1994 (N = 210) were randomized into two groups: laparoscopic (LA, n = 106) and open appendectomy (OA, n = 104). Patient demographics, pathological findings, operative time, postoperative course, and cost were analyzed. Age, gender, previous laparotomy, intraoperative diagnosis, and perforated appendix rate were comparable between both groups. Mean operative time was longer in the LA group (p < 0.05). Earlier resumption of a regular diet, shorter postoperative stay, and less postoperative analgesia also were observed in the LA group (p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity and hospital readmissions were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). Higher operative cost was observed in the LA group, but global cost was lower in this group (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic appendectomy shows a more comfortable postoperative course (oral resumption, postoperative stay, and analgesia) over open appendectomy, with similar postoperative morbidity. The LA group showed more operative but less global cost.
 ...
PMID:Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial. 928 68

A retrospective study was performed after introduction of the laparoscopic technique in patients with suspected appendicitis to validate it in comparison with conventional open appendectomy. A series of 103 patients with suspected acute appendicitis were included. In 51 consecutive patients, a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed, and, if needed, an appendectomy was carried out. Fifty-two consecutive patients underwent conventional appendectomy. The primary intention of the laparoscopy was diagnostic, but if the patient was found to suffer from appendicitis, a laparoscopic appendectomy was performed. Eight (16%) patients in the laparoscopic group had a healthy appendix that was left in place. Eleven (22%) patients in this group were converted to open appendectomy. There was no significant difference between the groups concerning age, sex, or diagnosis at the time of the operation, and there was also no significant difference in the postoperative hospital stay or complication rate between the groups. The postoperative need for analgesia was lower (p < 0.01) and the operation time was longer (p < 0.0001) in the laparoscopic group than the group that underwent open surgery. It can be concluded that the greatest benefits of the laparoscopic technique are that it causes less trauma, the diagnostic accuracy is better, and the cosmetic result is superior to that after a conventional operation. This is all at the price of a longer operation time.
 ...
PMID:Appendicitis: laparoscopic versus conventional operation: a study and review of the literature. 943 26


1 2 3 Next >>