European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie · 2013
Endoloop as the first line tool for appendiceal stump closure in children with appendicitis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Naiditch Jessica, Lautz Timothy, Chin Anthony, Browne Marybeth, Rowell Erin
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare outcomes for pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) performed either (1) using an endostapler (ES) to divide the appendix and mesoappendix or (2) using endoloops (ELs) to close the appendiceal stump and electrocautery to divide the mesoappendix.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent LA for suspected appendicitis 4 years at a free standing children's hospital. The use of EL and ES was compared separately in patients with perforated and nonperforated appendicitis. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in rate of postoperative abscess, rate of subsequent small bowel obstruction requiring operation or rate of intraperitoneal hematoma between the ES and EL groups for both nonperforated and perforated appendectomy cases. Superficial wound infection was more common in the nonperforated EL group (17/309, 5.5%) than in the nonperforated ES group (2/235, 0.9%; p = 0.007). Operative time for the EL technique (52.2 ± 15.8 minutes; p = 0.047) was shorter than for the ES technique (58 ± 23.2 minutes) for patients with perforated appendicitis.
CONCLUSION: EL stump closure and mesoappendix cauterization during LA is safe and effective in children with appendicitis, including perforated appendicitis.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent LA for suspected appendicitis 4 years at a free standing children's hospital. The use of EL and ES was compared separately in patients with perforated and nonperforated appendicitis. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in rate of postoperative abscess, rate of subsequent small bowel obstruction requiring operation or rate of intraperitoneal hematoma between the ES and EL groups for both nonperforated and perforated appendectomy cases. Superficial wound infection was more common in the nonperforated EL group (17/309, 5.5%) than in the nonperforated ES group (2/235, 0.9%; p = 0.007). Operative time for the EL technique (52.2 ± 15.8 minutes; p = 0.047) was shorter than for the ES technique (58 ± 23.2 minutes) for patients with perforated appendicitis.
CONCLUSION: EL stump closure and mesoappendix cauterization during LA is safe and effective in children with appendicitis, including perforated appendicitis.