The Medical journal of Malaysia · 2026
Comparison between Single Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) and Multi Port Laparoscopic Surgery (MPLA) in paediatric appendectomy patients.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pratama Y, Dwihantoro A, Gunadi, Ahmad Y I, Purnomo E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Single Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) and Multiport Laparoscopic Appendectomy (MPLA) are both established techniques for appendectomy, yet their differences in terms of aesthetics, operative wounds, and complications like wound dehiscence remain under study. This research compares the two approaches with a focus on minimizing surgical trauma and reducing infection risks.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted involving 49 patients, with 26 undergoing SILA and 23 undergoing MPLA across two hospitals in Yogyakarta. Patient demographics, appendicitis grade, length of stay (LOS), operative time, and postoperative complications, including dehiscence, were analyzed using SPSS.
RESULTS: Dehiscence was evaluated through outpatient follow-up based on wound leakage, while other complications were documented accordingly. The cohort comprised 17 female and 32 male patients (1:2 ratio), with no significant association between gender and appendicitis type (p=0.16). The most common appendicitis grade was grade 1 (36%), followed by grade 2 (34.7%), with chronic appendicitis being the least common (8.2%). was observed in 12.2% of cases, with 87.8% of wounds healing without issue. No significant difference in complication rates was found between SILA and MPLA techniques (p=0.876). LOS (p=0.523) and operative time (p=0.185) also showed no statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION: Both SILA and MPLA techniques for appendectomy offer comparable safety profiles, with no significant differences in complications, LOS, or operative time. SILA, however, may offer superior cosmetic outcomes due to fewer incisions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted involving 49 patients, with 26 undergoing SILA and 23 undergoing MPLA across two hospitals in Yogyakarta. Patient demographics, appendicitis grade, length of stay (LOS), operative time, and postoperative complications, including dehiscence, were analyzed using SPSS.
RESULTS: Dehiscence was evaluated through outpatient follow-up based on wound leakage, while other complications were documented accordingly. The cohort comprised 17 female and 32 male patients (1:2 ratio), with no significant association between gender and appendicitis type (p=0.16). The most common appendicitis grade was grade 1 (36%), followed by grade 2 (34.7%), with chronic appendicitis being the least common (8.2%). was observed in 12.2% of cases, with 87.8% of wounds healing without issue. No significant difference in complication rates was found between SILA and MPLA techniques (p=0.876). LOS (p=0.523) and operative time (p=0.185) also showed no statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION: Both SILA and MPLA techniques for appendectomy offer comparable safety profiles, with no significant differences in complications, LOS, or operative time. SILA, however, may offer superior cosmetic outcomes due to fewer incisions.