Surgery Department, School of Medical Sciences and Health of Juiz de Fora (SUPREMA), University Hospital Therezinha de Jesus, Rua Senador Salgado Filho 510/1002, Bairro Bom Pastor, Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, CEP: 36021-660, Brazil.
Department of Surgery, Macerata University Hospital, Macerata, Italy.
Updates Surg. 2020 Mar;72(1):185-191. doi: 10.1007/s13304-020-00711-y. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
Diffuse peritonitis represents a life-threatening complication of acute appendicitis (AA). Whether laparoscopy is a safe procedure and presents similar results compared with laparotomy in case of complicated AA is still a matter of debate. The objective of this study is to compare laparoscopic (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) for the management of diffuse peritonitis caused by AA. This is a prospective multicenter cohort study, including 223 patients with diffuse peritonitis from perforated AA, enrolled in the Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis (PIPAS) study from February to May 2018. Two groups were created: LA = 78 patients, mean age 42.51 ± 22.14 years and OA = 145 patients, mean age 38.44 ± 20.95 years. LA was employed in 34.98% of cases. There was no statically significant difference between LA and OA groups in terms of intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative peritonitis, rate of reoperation, and mortality. The wound infection rate was higher in the OA group (OR 21.63; 95% CI 3.46-895.47; P = 0.00). The mean postoperative hospital stay in the LA group was shorter than in the OA group (6.40 ± 4.29 days versus 7.8 ± 5.30 days; P = 0.032). Although LA was only used in one-third of cases, it is a safe procedure and should be considered in the management of patients with diffuse peritonitis caused by AA, respecting its indications.
弥漫性腹膜炎是急性阑尾炎(AA)的一种危及生命的并发症。在复杂的 AA 病例中,腹腔镜手术是否安全,并且与剖腹手术相比结果相似,这仍然是一个有争议的问题。本研究的目的是比较腹腔镜(LA)和开腹阑尾切除术(OA)治疗由穿孔性 AA 引起的弥漫性腹膜炎的效果。这是一项前瞻性多中心队列研究,纳入了 2018 年 2 月至 5 月期间 Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis(PIPAS)研究中 223 例弥漫性腹膜炎穿孔性 AA 患者。创建了两组:LA=78 例,平均年龄 42.51±22.14 岁;OA=145 例,平均年龄 38.44±20.95 岁。LA 应用于 34.98%的病例。LA 和 OA 组在腹腔脓肿、术后腹膜炎、再次手术率和死亡率方面无统计学差异。OA 组的伤口感染率较高(OR 21.63;95%CI 3.46-895.47;P=0.00)。LA 组的术后平均住院时间短于 OA 组(6.40±4.29 天比 7.8±5.30 天;P=0.032)。尽管 LA 仅应用于三分之一的病例,但它是一种安全的手术方法,应在治疗由 AA 引起的弥漫性腹膜炎时考虑,同时要尊重其适应证。