A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy

Adrian E. Ortega, John Hunter, Jeffrey H. Peters, Lee L. Swanstrom, Bruce Schirmer, Frederick Greene, William Sangster, David W. Rattner, Charles Ferguson, Nathaniel Soper, Joe Petelin, Stephen W. Unger, Keith N. Apelgren, Maurice E. Arregui

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

277 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are clear, the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) are more subtle. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether LA is deserving of more widespread clinical application than it has yet received. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized into three groups. LA with an endoscopic linear stapler (LAS) (U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Connecticut) was performed on 78 patients, LA with catgut ligatures (LAL) on 89, and open appendectomy (OA) on 86. LA was performed with a three-trocar technique. OA was accomplished through a right lower-quadrant transverse incision. Data with normal distributions were analyzed by analysis of variance. Nonparametric data were analyzed with either the Kruskal-Wallis H test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The mean operative times for the procedures were 66 ± 24 minutes (LAS), 68 ± 25 minutes (LAL), and 58 ± 27 minutes (OA). The relative brevity of OA compared to LAS and LAL was statistically significant (P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)208-213
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume169
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1995
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Appendectomy
Surgical Staplers
Catgut
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Normal Distribution
Operative Surgical Procedures
Appendicitis
Operative Time
Surgical Instruments
Ligation
Analysis of Variance
Randomized Controlled Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Ortega, A. E., Hunter, J., Peters, J. H., Swanstrom, L. L., Schirmer, B., Greene, F., ... Arregui, M. E. (1995). A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. American Journal of Surgery, 169(2), 208-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80138-X

A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. / Ortega, Adrian E.; Hunter, John; Peters, Jeffrey H.; Swanstrom, Lee L.; Schirmer, Bruce; Greene, Frederick; Sangster, William; Rattner, David W.; Ferguson, Charles; Soper, Nathaniel; Petelin, Joe; Unger, Stephen W.; Apelgren, Keith N.; Arregui, Maurice E.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 169, No. 2, 1995, p. 208-213.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ortega, AE, Hunter, J, Peters, JH, Swanstrom, LL, Schirmer, B, Greene, F, Sangster, W, Rattner, DW, Ferguson, C, Soper, N, Petelin, J, Unger, SW, Apelgren, KN & Arregui, ME 1995, 'A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy', American Journal of Surgery, vol. 169, no. 2, pp. 208-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80138-X
Ortega, Adrian E. ; Hunter, John ; Peters, Jeffrey H. ; Swanstrom, Lee L. ; Schirmer, Bruce ; Greene, Frederick ; Sangster, William ; Rattner, David W. ; Ferguson, Charles ; Soper, Nathaniel ; Petelin, Joe ; Unger, Stephen W. ; Apelgren, Keith N. ; Arregui, Maurice E. / A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. In: American Journal of Surgery. 1995 ; Vol. 169, No. 2. pp. 208-213.
@article{a4ead73180b84494b96bd5073906b42c,
title = "A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: While the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are clear, the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) are more subtle. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether LA is deserving of more widespread clinical application than it has yet received. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized into three groups. LA with an endoscopic linear stapler (LAS) (U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Connecticut) was performed on 78 patients, LA with catgut ligatures (LAL) on 89, and open appendectomy (OA) on 86. LA was performed with a three-trocar technique. OA was accomplished through a right lower-quadrant transverse incision. Data with normal distributions were analyzed by analysis of variance. Nonparametric data were analyzed with either the Kruskal-Wallis H test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The mean operative times for the procedures were 66 ± 24 minutes (LAS), 68 ± 25 minutes (LAL), and 58 ± 27 minutes (OA). The relative brevity of OA compared to LAS and LAL was statistically significant (P",
author = "Ortega, {Adrian E.} and John Hunter and Peters, {Jeffrey H.} and Swanstrom, {Lee L.} and Bruce Schirmer and Frederick Greene and William Sangster and Rattner, {David W.} and Charles Ferguson and Nathaniel Soper and Joe Petelin and Unger, {Stephen W.} and Apelgren, {Keith N.} and Arregui, {Maurice E.}",
year = "1995",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80138-X",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "169",
pages = "208--213",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy

AU - Ortega, Adrian E.

AU - Hunter, John

AU - Peters, Jeffrey H.

AU - Swanstrom, Lee L.

AU - Schirmer, Bruce

AU - Greene, Frederick

AU - Sangster, William

AU - Rattner, David W.

AU - Ferguson, Charles

AU - Soper, Nathaniel

AU - Petelin, Joe

AU - Unger, Stephen W.

AU - Apelgren, Keith N.

AU - Arregui, Maurice E.

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - BACKGROUND: While the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are clear, the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) are more subtle. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether LA is deserving of more widespread clinical application than it has yet received. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized into three groups. LA with an endoscopic linear stapler (LAS) (U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Connecticut) was performed on 78 patients, LA with catgut ligatures (LAL) on 89, and open appendectomy (OA) on 86. LA was performed with a three-trocar technique. OA was accomplished through a right lower-quadrant transverse incision. Data with normal distributions were analyzed by analysis of variance. Nonparametric data were analyzed with either the Kruskal-Wallis H test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The mean operative times for the procedures were 66 ± 24 minutes (LAS), 68 ± 25 minutes (LAL), and 58 ± 27 minutes (OA). The relative brevity of OA compared to LAS and LAL was statistically significant (P

AB - BACKGROUND: While the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are clear, the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) are more subtle. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether LA is deserving of more widespread clinical application than it has yet received. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized into three groups. LA with an endoscopic linear stapler (LAS) (U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Connecticut) was performed on 78 patients, LA with catgut ligatures (LAL) on 89, and open appendectomy (OA) on 86. LA was performed with a three-trocar technique. OA was accomplished through a right lower-quadrant transverse incision. Data with normal distributions were analyzed by analysis of variance. Nonparametric data were analyzed with either the Kruskal-Wallis H test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The mean operative times for the procedures were 66 ± 24 minutes (LAS), 68 ± 25 minutes (LAL), and 58 ± 27 minutes (OA). The relative brevity of OA compared to LAS and LAL was statistically significant (P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028843580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028843580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80138-X

DO - 10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80138-X

M3 - Article

C2 - 7840381

AN - SCOPUS:0028843580

VL - 169

SP - 208

EP - 213

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 2

ER -