J Korean Surg Soc.  2012 Mar;82(3):172-178. 10.4174/jkss.2012.82.3.172.

Pain after laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparison of transumbilical single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgery

• Kim HO
• Yoo CH
• Lee SR
• Son BH
• Park YL
• Shin JH
• Kim H
• Han WK

• KMID: 2212219
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2012.82.3.172

Abstract

PURPOSE
Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy is performed using three ports, and single-port appendectomy is an attractive alternative in order to improve cosmesis. The aim of this study was to compare pain after transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SA) with pain after conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TA).
METHODS
From April to September 2011, 50 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for simple appendicitis without gangrene or perforation. Patients who had undergone appendectomy with a drainage procedure were excluded. The type of surgery was chosen based on patient preference after written informed consent was obtained. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain evaluated by the visual analogue scale score and postoperative analgesic use. Operative time, recovery of bowel function, and length of hospital stay were secondary outcome measures.
RESULTS
SA using a SILS port (Covidien) was performed in 17 patients. The other 33 patients underwent TA. Pain scores in the 24 hours after surgery were higher in patients who underwent SA (P = 0.009). The change in postoperative pain score over time was significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.021). SA patients received more total doses of analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) in the 24 hours following surgery, but the difference was not statistically significant. The median operative time was longer for SA (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic surgeons should be concerned about longer operation times and higher immediate postoperative pain scores in patients who undergo SA.

Keyword

Appendicitis; Laparoscopic appendectomy; Single incision; SILS port; Postoperative pain

MeSH Terms

Analgesics
Appendectomy
Appendicitis
Drainage
Gangrene
Humans
Informed Consent
Laparoscopy
Length of Stay
Operative Time
Pain, Postoperative
Patient Preference
Analgesics

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SA). (A) Preoperative view. (B) A longitudinal umbilical incision about 20 mm in length. (C) The SILS port was inserted into the umbilical incision. (D) External view during SA. (E) The mesoappendix was first divided using ultrasonic shears. (F) The base of the appendix was ligated using a round loop. (G, H) The resected appendix was removed with the aid of a bag.

• 

  Fig. 2 Postoperative pain score on the visual analogue scale according to the number of ports as a function of time after laparoscopic appendectomy. a)Pain in the 24 hours after surgery was higher in patients who underwent transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (P = 0.009; corrected by Bonferroni's method).

• 

  Fig. 3 The change in the visual analogue scale pain score as a function of postoperative time was significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.021 by repeated measures analysis of variance).

• 

  Fig. 4 Example of cosmetic results in this study. (A) At the time of closure. (B) Seven days postoperatively.

Reference

1. Tiwari MM, Reynoso JF, Tsang AW, Oleynikov D. Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy in management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Ann Surg. 2011. 254:927–932.

2. Wei HB, Huang JL, Zheng ZH, Wei B, Zheng F, Qiu WS, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized comparison. Surg Endosc. 2010. 24:266–269.

3. Wei B, Qi CL, Chen TF, Zheng ZH, Huang JL, Hu BG, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a metaanalysis. Surg Endosc. 2011. 25:1199–1208.

4. Chouillard E, Dache A, Torcivia A, Helmy N, Ruseykin I, Gumbs A. Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2010. 24:1861–1865.

5. Chow A, Purkayastha S, Nehme J, Darzi LA, Paraskeva P. Single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a retrospective comparative analysis. Surg Endosc. 2010. 24:2567–2574.

6. Hong TH, Kim HL, Lee YS, Kim JJ, Lee KH, You YK, et al. Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA): scarless intracorporeal appendectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009. 19:75–78.

7. Kim HJ, Lee JI, Lee YS, Lee IK, Park JH, Lee SK, et al. Single-port transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy: 43 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc. 2010. 24:2765–2769.

8. Lee J, Baek J, Kim W. Laparoscopic transumbilical single-port appendectomy: initial experience and comparison with three-port appendectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2010. 20:100–103.

9. Lee SY, Lee HM, Hsieh CS, Chuang JH. Transumbilical laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a reliable one-port procedure. Surg Endosc. 2011. 25:1115–1120.

10. Lee YS, Kim JH, Moon EJ, Kim JJ, Lee KH, Oh SJ, et al. Comparative study on surgical outcomes and operative costs of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in adult patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009. 19:493–496.

11. Ohno Y, Morimura T, Hayashi S. Transumbilical laparoscopically assisted appendectomy in children: the results of a single-port, single-channel procedure. Surg Endosc. 2012. 26:523–527.

12. Raakow R, Jacob DA. Initial experience in laparoscopic single-port appendectomy: a pilot study. Dig Surg. 2011. 28:74–79.

13. St Peter SD, Adibe OO, Juang D, Sharp SW, Garey CL, Laituri CA, et al. Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2011. 254:586–590.

14. Park JH, Hyun KH, Park CH, Choi SY, Choi WH, Kim DJ, et al. Laparoscopic vs transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy; results of prospective randomized trial. J Korean Surg Soc. 2010. 78:213–218.

15. Vettoretto N, Gobbi S, Corradi A, Belli F, Piccolo D, Pernazza G, et al. Consensus conference on laparoscopic appendectomy: development of guidelines. Colorectal Dis. 2011. 13:748–754.

16. Fazili FM, Al-Bouq Y, El-Hassan OM, Gaffar HF. Laparoscope-assisted appendectomy in adults: the two-trocar technique. Ann Saudi Med. 2006. 26:100–104.

17. Stanfill AB, Matilsky DK, Kalvakuri K, Pearl RH, Wallace LJ, Vegunta RK. Transumbilical laparoscopically assisted appendectomy: an alternative minimally invasive technique in pediatric patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2010. 20:873–876.

18. Cervini P, Smith LC, Urbach DR. The effect of intraoperative bupivacaine administration on parenteral narcotic use after laparoscopic appendectomy. Surg Endosc. 2002. 16:1579–1582.

19. Sandeman DJ, Bennett M, Dilley AV, Perczuk A, Lim S, Kelly KJ. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane blocks for laparoscopic appendicectomy in children: a prospective randomized trial. Br J Anaesth. 2011. 106:882–886.

20. Conaghan P, Maxwell-Armstrong C, Bedforth N, Gornall C, Baxendale B, Hong LL, et al. Efficacy of transversus abdominis plane blocks in laparoscopic colorectal resections. Surg Endosc. 2010. 24:2480–2484.