Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic appendectomy: Hem-o-lok versus Endoloop in stump closure

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are several techniques described to close the appendicular stump during laparoscopic appendectomy. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and usefulness of the Hem-o-lok clip for the closure of appendicular stump, comparing these data with those concerning the endo-loop. We conducted a retrospective study that compared two groups of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy from 2010 to 2015 at our institution. We used the Endoloop to close the stump in the first group (group I) and the Hem-o-lok in the second group (group II). We reviewed patient’s data including: complications, operative time, length of stay, costs. There were 121 patients in group I and 138 patients in group II. The mean operative times were 40.5 min in group I and 36.4 min in the group II. No intraoperative complications and no mortality were observed in either group. The mean postoperative length of hospital stay was similar for both groups. There was no rehospitalization after discharge. The complication rate did not reach statistical significance between the groups. The cost of the procedure using the Hem-o-lok has been lower than using the Endoloop. Both the Endoloop and Hem-o-lok are safe for the closure of the appendicular stump. Hem-o-lok appears to be superior than Endoloop in terms of easeness of use and cheapness, maintaining the same safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Semm K (1983) Endoscopic appendectomy. Endoscopy 15:59–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mayir B, Bilecik T, Ensari CO, Oruc MT (2014) Laparoscopic appendectomy with hand-made loop. Videosurg Other Miniinvasive Tech 9(2):152–156. doi:10.5114/wiitm.2014.41624

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Guller U, Hervey S, Purves H et al (2004) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database. Ann Surg 239:43–52

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Mayir B, Ensari CÖ, Bilecik T, Aslaner A, Oruç MT (2015) Methods for closure of appendix stump during laparoscopic appendectomy procedure. Turk J Surg Ulusal Cerrahi Derg 31(4):229–231. doi:10.5152/UCD.2015.2768

    Google Scholar 

  5. Partecke LI, Kessler W, Patrzyk M et al (2011) Comparison among different closure methods of the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy. Surg Technol Int 21:85–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Miyano G, Urao M, Lane GJ et al (2011) A prospective analysis of endoloops and endostaples for closing the stump of the appendix in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21:177–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Delibegovic S, Matovic E (2009) Hem-o-lok plastic clips in securing of the base of the appendix during laparoscopic appendectomy. Surg Endosc 23:2851–2854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Colak E, Kement M, Ozlem N et al (2013) A comparison of nonabsorbable polymeric clips and endoloop li- gatures for the closure of the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective, randomized study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 23:255–258

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA (2010) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6(10):CD001546

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ortega AE, Hunter JG, Peters JH et al (1995) A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. Laparoscopic Appendectomy Study Group. Am J Surg 169:208–212

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wei B, Qi CL, Chen TF, Zheng ZH et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a metaanalysis. Surg Endosc 25:1199–1208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Loh A, Taylor RS (1992) Laparoscopic appendectomy. Br J Surg 27:289–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Schreiber JH (1987) Early experience with laparoscopic appendectomy in women. Surg Endosc 1:211–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schick KS, Huttl TP, Fertmann JM et al (2008) A critical analysis of laparoscopic appendectomy: how experience with 1,400 appendectomies allowed innovative treatment to become standard in a university hospital. World J Surg 32:1406–1413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Matyja M, Strzałka M (2016) Rembiasz K laparosocopic appendectomy, cost-effectiveness of three different techniques used to close the appendix stump. Polish J Surg 87(12):634–637. doi:10.1515/pjs-2016-0015

    Google Scholar 

  16. Vettoretto N, Montori G, Bartoli M, Giovanetti M (2012) Lesson learned from 10 years’ experience in laparoscopic appendectomy in a community hospital. Updates Surg 64:285–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Agresta F, Arezzo A, Allaix ME, Adolfo S, Anania G (2016) Current status of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the emergency setting. Updates Surg 68:47–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale della Romagna, General and Thoracic Surgery Unit, Ceccarini Hospital, Viale Frosinone, 47838, Riccione, RN, Italy

    Andrea Lucchi, Pierluigi Berti, Michele Grassia, Luca Maria Siani, Carlo Gabbianelli & Gianluca Garulli

Authors
  1. Andrea Lucchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pierluigi Berti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michele Grassia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luca Maria Siani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carlo Gabbianelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gianluca Garulli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gianluca Garulli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study and additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lucchi, A., Berti, P., Grassia, M. et al. Laparoscopic appendectomy: Hem-o-lok versus Endoloop in stump closure. Updates Surg 69, 61–65 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-016-0413-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-016-0413-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation