Volume : 7, Issue : 5, May - 2018

TO REVIEW THE OUTCOME OF LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDICECTOMY VERSUS OPEN APPENDICECTOMY

Prof. Rajeev Sinha, Dr. Sudhanshu Sharma

Abstract :

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:&#10;normal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;">Proponents of laparoscopic appendectomy emphasize the advantages of laparoscopic operation decreased hospitalization, less operating time and minimal complication. this study includes comparison between laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. 50 patients in each group were included in the study during the period of November 2015 to June 2017.There were 60 male patients while female patients were 40.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>Of the 60 male patients, 34 patients underwent LA while 26 patients underwent OA.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>16 female patients underwent LA, while 24 female patients underwent OA.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>All patients<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>presented with complaint<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>pain.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>Nausea was present in 54% of the<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>patients and vomiting in 81%.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>Fever was present in 58%.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Per-operative diagnosis were slightly different than USG findings . 19% patients had enlarged appendix with dilated bowel loop, 4% patients had adhesions of bowel, 61% patients had acute appendicitis with omental adhesion, 8 % patients had RIF collection, 2% patients had only inflamed appendix, 3%patients had gangrenous perforated appendix with flakes, 3% patients<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>had<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>enlarged dilated appendix with dilated bowel loop. In our study most common anatomical position was retrocaecal 72%, 24% had pelvic postion,1%<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>had preileal and 3% had subcaecalposition. Operating time was longer in the OA group compared to LA group<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>and was statistically significant.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>The median operation time for the LA was 20-30 minutes while that of OA was 40-50 minutes.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>Patients who underwent LA had a shorter hospital stay compared to OA group.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>The average duration of hospital stay for LA group in the study was 3-4 days while for the OA group was 5-6 days.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>In the LA group, only 1 patient (2%) developed caecal perforation, while 3 (6%) patients developed port site infections . For those undergoing OA, 16% had<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>complications.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">&nbsp; </span>The most common being wound sepsis, which occurred, in 14% of the patients. One patient had developed small bowel obstruction which was diagnosed 7 days after the surgery.<span style="color:red;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"><o:p></o:p></span></span></b></p>

Keywords :


Cite This Article:

Prof. Rajeev Sinha, Dr. Sudhanshu Sharma, TO REVIEW THE OUTCOME OF LAPAROSCOPIC APPENDICECTOMY VERSUS OPEN APPENDICECTOMY, GLOBAL JOURNAL FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS : Volume-7 | Issue-5 | May-2018


Article No. : 1


Number of Downloads : 1


References :