Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: What is the real difference? Results of a prospective randomized double-blinded trial

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The comparison of laparoscopic to open appendectomy has been reviewed in many retrospective and prospective studies. Some report shorter hospital stays, less postoperative pain, and earlier return to work while others fail to demonstrate such differences. We performed a prospective, randomized double-blinded trial to evaluate this ongoing debate. Methods: Fifty-two consecutive men presenting with signs and symptoms suggestive of acute appendicitis were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic appendectomy or open appendectomy. Length of operative times, hospital stay, lost work days, visual analog pain scores, and operative costs were compared. Results: Length of stay averaged 21.5 h for the laparoscopic group and was not statistically different when compared to the open group. Perceived postoperative pain on postoperative days 1 and 7 were not statistically different between the two groups. Mean time to return to work was 11 days, and there was no statistical difference between groups. Operative costs were >$600 greater for the laparoscopic approach. Conclusions: In this prospective randomized double-blinded trial, laparoscopic appendectomy appears to confer no significant advantage over open appendectomy for postoperative pain or lost work days. It does carry an increase in operating room costs and, contrary to other reports, hospital stay is not shortened. Further studies are needed to determine if specific populations, such as the obese or women, may benefit from a minimally invasive approach to appendicitis.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. K Apelgren R Molnar J Kisala (1995) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic is not better than open appendectomy. Am Surg 61 240–243 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqC1Mzpt1c%3D Occurrence Handle7887538

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. F Bonanni J Reed G Hartzell D Trostle R Boorse M Gittleman A Cole (1994) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy. J Am Coll Surg 179 273–278 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuA2cfmsVc%3D Occurrence Handle8069421

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. M Cox J McCall J Toouli R Padbury T Wilson D Wattchow M Langcake (1996) ArticleTitleProspective randomized comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in men. World J Surg 20 263–266 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s002689900041 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymA38rmt1U%3D Occurrence Handle8661828

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. L Enochsson A Hellberg C Rudberg G Fenyo T Gudbjartson E Kullman I Ringqvist S Sorensen J Wenner (2001) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic vs open appendectomy in overweight patients. Surg Endosc 15 387–392 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2Fht1yiuw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11395821

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. R Frazee J Roberts R Symmonds S Snyder J Hendricks R Smith M Custer J Harrison (1994) ArticleTitleA Prospective randomized trial comparing open versus laparoscopic appendectomy. Ann Surg 219 725–728 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuB28zjtVA%3D Occurrence Handle8203983

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. J Hansen B Smithers D Schache D Wall B Miller B Menzies (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus open appendectomy: prospective randomized trial. World J Surg 20 17–20 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s002689900003 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymC2cfjsVI%3D Occurrence Handle8588406

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. R Hart C Rajgopal A Plewes J Sweeney W Davies D Gray B Taylor (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial of 81 patients. Can J Surg 39 457–462 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiC3MrktV0%3D Occurrence Handle8956810

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. L Martin I Puente J Sosa A Bassin R Breslaw M McKenney E Ginzburg D Sleeman (1995) ArticleTitleOpen versus laparoscopic appendectomy. A prospective randomized comparison. Ann Surg 222 256–261 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqH3cjpsF0%3D Occurrence Handle7677456

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. L McCahill C Pellegrini T Wiggins W Helton (1996) ArticleTitleA clinical outcome and cost analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy. Am J Surg 171 533–537 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymB2crht1U%3D Occurrence Handle8651403

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. D Mutter M Vix A Bui S Evrard V Tassetti J Breton J Marescaux (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopy not recommended for routine appendectomy in men: results of a prospective randomized study. Surgery 120 71–74 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymA3cbktFQ%3D Occurrence Handle8693426

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. JB Olsen CJ Myren PE Haahr (1993) ArticleTitleRandomized study of the value of laparoscopy before appendicectomy. Br J Surg 80 922–930 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByyA2sbosVE%3D Occurrence Handle8369940

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. O Reiertsen E Trondsen A Bakka O Andersen S Larsen A Rosseland (1994) ArticleTitleProspective nonrandomized study of conventional versusu laparoscopic appendectomy. World J Surg 18 411–415 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuA2sfmtlw%3D Occurrence Handle8091783

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. K Richards K Fisher J Flores B Christensen (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic appendectomy: comparison with open appendectomy in 720 patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc 6 205–209 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00019509-199606000-00008 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymA3szgtVQ%3D Occurrence Handle8743364

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. V Vallina J Velasco C McCulloch (1993) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy. Ann Surg 218 685–692 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuD2MfjvFY%3D Occurrence Handle8239785

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. CM Whitworth PW Whitworth J Sanfillipo H Polk (1988) ArticleTitleValue of diagnostic laparoscopy in young women with possible appendicitis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 167 187–190 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BieA387pvVU%3D Occurrence Handle2970682

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. M Williams Jr Collins T Wright M Fenoglio (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus open appendectomy. South Med J 89 668–674 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymB1MrpslA%3D Occurrence Handle8685751

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Chief, Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Washington, DC, Clinical investigation Program sponsored this study (CIP #P00-058).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Naval Medical Center—Portsmouth, Charette Health Care Center, 27 Effingham Street, Portsmouth, VA 23708-2197, USA

    R. C. Ignacio, R. Burke, D. Spencer, C. Bissell, C. Dorsainvil & P. A. Lucha

Authors
  1. R. C. Ignacio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Burke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Spencer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Bissell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. Dorsainvil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. P. A. Lucha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. A. Lucha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

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. Surg Endosc 18, 334–337 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8927-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8927-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation