Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 14, Issue 12, pp 1955–1962

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: An Analysis of Outcomes in 17,199 Patients Using ACS/NSQIP

  • Andrew J. Page
  • Jonathan D. Pollock
  • Sebastian Perez
  • S. Scott Davis
  • Edward Lin
  • John F. Sweeney
Original Article



The current study was undertaken to evaluate the outcomes for open and laparoscopic appendectomy using the 2008 American College of Surgeons: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS/NSQIP) Participant Use File (PUF). We hypothesized that laparoscopic appendectomy would have fewer infectious complications, superior perioperative outcomes, and decreased morbidity and mortality when compared to open appendectomy.

Study Design

Using the Current Procedural Technology (CPT) codes for open (44950) and laparoscopic (44970) appendectomy, 17, 199 patients were identified from the ACS/NSQIP PUF file that underwent appendectomy in 2008. Univariate analysis with chi-squared tests for categorical data and t tests or ANOVA tests for continuous data was used. Binary logistic regression models were used to evaluate outcomes for independent association by multivariable analysis.


Of the patients, 3,025 underwent open appendectomy and 14,174 underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy had significantly shorter operative times and hospital length of stay. They also had a significantly lower incidence of superficial and deep surgical site infections, wound disruptions, fewer complications, and lower perioperative mortality when compared to patients undergoing open appendectomy.


Using the ACS/NSQIP PUF file, we demonstrate that laparoscopic appendectomy has better outcomes than open appendectomy for the treatment of appendicitis. While the operative treatment of appendicitis is surgeon specific, this study lends support to the laparoscopic approach for patients requiring appendectomy.


Laparoscopy Appendectomy Complications 


  1. 1.
    McBurney C. IV. The incision made in the abdominal wall in cases of appendicitis, with a description of a new method of operating. Annals of Surgery 1894; 20(1):38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Addiss D, Shaffer N, Fowler B, Tauxe R. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. American journal of epidemiology 1990; 132(5):910.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reddick E, Olsen D, Daniell J, et al. Laparoscopic laser cholecystectomy. Laser Medicine and Surgery News and Advances 1989; 7(1):38–40.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Semm K. Pelviscopic appendectomy. Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) 1988; 113(1):3Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer E. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; 4:6699–6701.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khuri S, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Annals of Surgery 1998; 228(4):491.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fink A, Campbell Jr D, Mentzer Jr R, et al. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in non-veterans administration hospitals: initial demonstration of feasibility. Annals of Surgery 2002; 236(3):344.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biondo S, Ramos E, Deiros M, et al. Prognostic factors for mortality in left colonic peritonitis: a new scoring system1. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2000; 191(6):635–642.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tabatabai A, Hashemi M, Mohajeri G, et al. Incidence and risk factors predisposing anastomotic leak after transhiatal esophagectomy. Annals of Thoracic Medicine 2009; 4(4):197.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamamoto T, Allan R, Keighley M. Risk factors for intra-abdominal sepsis after surgery in Crohn’s disease. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 2000; 43(8):1141–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Esteban Varela J, Wilson S, Nguyen N. Laparoscopic surgery significantly reduces surgical-site infections compared with open surgery. Surgical Endoscopy 2010: 24 (2): 270–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Culver D, Horan T, Gaynes R, et al. Surgical wound infection rates by wound class, operative procedure, and patient risk index. The American Journal of Medicine 1991; 91(3):S152–S157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brill A, Ghosh K, Gunnarsson C, et al. The effects of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, hysterectomy, and appendectomy on nosocomial infection risks. Surgical Endoscopy 2008; 22(4):1112–1118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Olmi S, Magnone S, Bertolini A, Croce E. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in acute appendicitis: a randomized prospective study. Surgical Endoscopy 2005; 19(9):1193–1195.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Katkhouda N, Mason RJ, Towfigh S, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Ann Surg 2005; 242(3):439–48; discussion 448–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Minne L, Varner D, Burnell A, et al. Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy: prospective randomized study of outcomes. Archives of Surgery 1997; 132(7):708.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ignacio R, Burke R, Spencer D, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: what is the real difference? Results of a prospective randomized double-blinded trial. Surgical Endoscopy 2004; 18(2):334–337.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moberg A, Berndsen F, Palmquist I, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for confirmed appendicitis. British Journal of Surgery 2005; 92(3):298–304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bennett J, Boddy A, Rhodes M. Choice of approach for appendicectomy: a meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques 2007; 17(4):245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew J. Page
    • 1
  • Jonathan D. Pollock
    • 1
  • Sebastian Perez
    • 1
  • S. Scott Davis
    • 1
  • Edward Lin
    • 1
  • John F. Sweeney
    • 2
  1. 1.Emory Endosurgery UnitDivision of General and Gastrointestinal SurgeryAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery Quality OfficeEmory University School of MedicineAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations