Analysis of the Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Appendectomy Compared to Laparotomy in the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Objective:To analyze the clinical effects of laparoscopic appendectomy compared to traditional laparotomy in treating acute appendicitis.Methods:90 patients with acute appendicitis were selected as research subjects.They were divided into a control group and an observation group,with 45 cases in each group.The control group underwent traditional laparotomy,while the observation group underwent laparoscopic appendectomy.The intraoperative indicators,postoperative recovery indicators,postoperative stress indicators,and postoperative complications of the two groups were compared.Results:The operative time of the observation group was longer,but the incision length was shorter and the blood loss was lesser(P<0.05);the observation group had shorter postoperative first gas-passing time,recovery of gastrointestinal function,ambulation time,and lower postoperative pain score.The observation group had lower postoperative stress index levels(P<0.05);the observation group had a lower postoperative complication rate(P<0.05).Conclusion:Aside from prolonging the operative time,laparoscopic appendectomy is more ideal than traditional laparotomy in all other indicators and has better therapeutic effects in treating acute appendicitis.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy:Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the differences in clinical benefits and disadvantages of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy(SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy(CLA).METHODS: The Cochrane Library,MEDLINE,Embase,Science Citation Index Expanded,and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were electronically searched up through January 2013 to identify randomized controlled trails(RCTs) comparing SILA with CLA.Data was extracted from eligible studies to evaluate the pooled outcome effects for the total of 1068 patients.The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.2.0.For dichotomous data and continuous data,the risk ratio(RR) and the mean difference(MD) were calculated,respectively,with 95%CI for both.For continuous outcomes with different measurement scales in different RCTs,the standardized mean difference(SMD) was calculated with 95%CI.Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed when necessary.RESULTS: Six RCTs were identified that compared SILA(n = 535) with CLA(n = 533).Five RCTs had a high risk of bias and one RCT had a low risk of bias.SILA was associated with longer operative time(MD = 5.68,95%CI: 3.91-7.46,P < 0.00001),higher conversion rate(RR = 5.14,95%CI: 1.25-21.10,P = 0.03) and better cosmetic satisfaction score(MD = 0.52,95%CI: 0.30-0.73,P < 0.00001) compared with CLA.No significant differences were found for total complications(RR = 1.15,95%CI: 0.76-1.75,P = 0.51),drain insertion(RR = 0.72,95%CI: 0.41-1.25,P = 0.24),or length of hospital stay(SMD = 0.04,95%CI:-0.08-0.16,P = 0.57).Because there was not enough data among the analyzed RCTs,postoperative pain was not calculated.CONCLUSION: The benefit of SILA is cosmetic satisfaction,while the disadvantages of SILA are longer operative time and higher conversion rate.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy

Acute appendicitis(AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy(LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Nonoperative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient's factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon's skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner(i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.

Laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy

AIM: To compare laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy in light of recent data at our centre.METHODS: The data of patients who underwen appendectomy between January 2011 and June 2013 were collected. The data included patients' demographic data, procedure time, length of hospital stay, the need for pain medicine, postoperative visual analog scale o pain, and morbidities. Pregnant women and patients with previous lower abdominal surgery were excluded Patients with surgery converted from laparoscopic appendectomy(LA) to mini-incision open appendectomy(MOA) were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups: LA and MOA done by the same surgeon. The patients were randomized into MOA and LA groups a computer-generated number. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made by the surgeon with physica examination, laboratory values, and radiological tests(abdominal ultrasound or computed tomography). Al operations were performed with general anaesthesia The postoperative vision analog scale score was recorded at postoperative hours 1, 6, 12, and 24. Patients were discharged when they tolerated normal food and passed gas and were followed up every week for three weeks as outpatients.RESULTS: Of the 243 patients, 121(49.9%) underwen MOA, while 122(50.1%) had laparoscopic appendectomy There were no significant differences in operation time between the two groups(P = 0.844), whereas the visua analog scale of pain was significantly higher in the open appendectomy group at the 1st hour(P = 0.001), 6th hour(P = 0.001), and 12 th hour(P = 0.027). The need for analgesic medication was significantly higher in the MOA group(P = 0.001). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of morbidity rate(P = 0.599)The rate of total complications was similar between the two groups(6.5% in LA vs 7.4% in OA, P = 0.599). Al wound infections were treated non-surgically. Six ou of seven patients with pelvic abscess were successfully treated with percutaneous drainage; one patient requiredsurgical drainage after a failed percutaneous drainage. There were no differences in the period of hospital stay, operation time, and postoperative complication rate between the two groups. Laparoscopic appendectomy decreases the need for analgesic medications and the visual analog scale of pain.CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic appendectomy should be considered as a standard treatment for acute appendicitis. Mini-incision appendectomy is an alternative for a select group of patients.

Laparoscopic appendectomy,stump closure and endoloops:A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Acute appendicitis(AA)is one of the main indications for urgent surgery.Laparoscopic appendectomy(LA)has shown advantages in terms of clinical results and cost-effectiveness,even if there is still controversy about different devices to utilize,especially with regards to the endoloop(EL)vs endostapler(ES)when it comes to stump closure.AIM To compare safety and cost-effectiveness of EL vs ES.METHODS From a prospectively maintained database,data of 996 consecutive patients treated by LA with a 3 years-follow up in the department of Emergency General Surgery-St Orsola University Hospital,Bologna(Italy)were retrieved.A metaanalysis was performed in terms of surgical complications,in comparison to the international literature published from 1995 to 2021.RESULTS The meta-analysis showed no evidence regarding wound infections,abdominal abscesses,and total post-operative complications,in terms of superiority of a surgical technique for the stump closure in LA.CONCLUSION Even when AA is complicated,the routine use of EL is safe in most patients.

Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy at a Single Center

Background and Objectives: Recently, single-incision laparoscopic surgery has been popular for minimally invasive surgery and cosmetic improvement. We studied outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) in accordance with our strategy for acute appendicitis. Methods: Clinical outcomes were revealed in each of nine emergency SILA (e-SILA) cases and eight interval SILA (i-SILA) cases performed for the treatment of acute appendicitis between September 2010 and August 2012 at our hospital. Results: The male to female ratio was 6:3 for e-SILA and 5:3 for i-SILA cases. Mean ages were 33.1 ± 17.8 years and 41 ± 21.6 years for e-SILA and i-SILA, respectively. The pretreatment white blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were 14960 ± 4080/μL and 1.4 ± 2.3 mg/d, respectively, for e-SILA and 12657 ± 4290/μL and 6.7 ± 8.3 mg/d, respectively, for i-SILA. The maximum transverse diameter of appendix was 12.6 ± 3.5 mm for e-SILA and 11.6 ± 3.5 mm for i-SILA. Appendiceal abscesses were encountered in one (11%) e-SILA and three (38%) i-SILA cases. Perforation of the appendix at operation occurred in two (22%) e-SILA cases and no i-SILA cases. Generalized peritonitis occurred in 4 (44%) e-SILA cases but in none of the i-SILA cases. The postoperative hospital stay was 5.3 days for e-SILA, 2.7 days for i-SILA. Conversion to laparotomy was not required in either group. One additional trocar was needed for an e-SILA case, and paralytic ileus occurred as a postoperative complication in one e-SILA case. Conclusion: The outcomes of SILA performed under our strategy were acceptable and useful without major postoperative complications.

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways for patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:To compare the benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS)pathways with traditional pathways for adult patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy.Methods:We looked for publications using the keywords“Enhanced Recovery After Surgery,”“Fast-track Surgery,”“Laparoscopic Appendectomy,”and“Laparoscopic Appendicectomy”in PubMed/Medline,Embase,and the Cochrane library.Operative time,lesser length of stay,oral intake timing,readmission rate,pain/satisfaction levels,readmission rate,and surgical site infections were recorded and analyzed.Results:A total of 95 articles from registers and 161 articles from databases were identified.Three eligible studies were included.The ERAS pathways had a lesser length of stay[Z=2.06,MD=−1.05,95%CI=(−2.04,−0.05),P=0.04]and an earlier start to postoperative feeds[Z=6.22,MD=−267.49,95%CI=(−351.80,−183.19),P<001].Conclusions:ERAS pathways have a shorter length of stay and earlier postoperative feed initiation for adult patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy compared with standard care.Both approaches have similar operative time,surgical site infection incidence,and readmission rate.Clinical registration:This review is registered with INPLASY202280005.

Laparoscopic versus Open Appendectomy Outcomes

Background: Appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies requiring an appendectomy, with a life-time risk of 6%. The overall mortality rate for open appendectomy (OA) is around 0.3% and morbidity is about 11%. Objective: To compare laparoscopic vs open appendectomy with regard to postoperative pain and nausea, operative results, perioperative and postoperative complications, hospital admission. Methods: This prospective comparative study is performed in the Department of Surgery, North West Aramed Forced Hospital, Tabuk, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. All patients between 13 and 60 years of age admitted through the accident and emergency (A&E) department with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and those who completed follow-up are included in the study. All those patients in whom a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis was not established or have a palpable mass in the right lower quadrant, suggesting an appendiceal abscess and those who does not give consent are excluded from the study. We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent a laparoscopic and open appendectomy in King Salman Armed Forces Hospital, Saudi Arabia from 1/1/2012 to 31/12/2015. Result: A total of 502 patients underwent Appendectomy at King Salman Armed Forces Hospital from 1/1/2012 till 31/12/2015. Of these, 203 were male (40.4%) and 299 were female (59.6%). The mean age was 18 years. Alvarado Score more than 7 in 93% of patients diagnosed with appendicitis. Comorbidities included diabetes 21 (5.56%) and hypertension 7 (1.39%). The mean Body Mass Index (BMI) was 20 kg/m2. 328 patients (65.3%) underwent Open Appendectomy (OA). None of Laproscopic appendectomy(LA) had a conversion. The mean operative time was 76 minutes (44 minutes and 50 minutes for OA and LA, respectively). Mean hospital stay in OA 2 days and one day LA. Eight cases (1.6%) developed seroma (6 cases in OA and 2 cases in LA with rates of 1.2% and 0.4% respectively). Nine patients (1.6%) had wound infection, 8 in OA and one in LA with rate of 1.5% and 0.2% respectively). Four patients (0.8%) develop the hematoma (3 cases in OA and one case in LA with rates of 0.6% and 0.2% respectively). Seven cases of reported appendectomy develop the pelvic abscess (1.4%) (5 cases in OA and 2 cases in LA with rates of 1% and 0.4% respectively). Conclusion: Alvarado Score carries high significance in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy has improved diagnostic accuracy along with advantages in terms of fewer seroma, hematoma, wound infections, faster recovery, and earlier retention to normal activity but longer operative time.

Laparoscopic treatment of perforated appendicitis

The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with less wound pain, less wound infection, a shorter hospital stay, and faster overall recovery when compared to the open appendectomy for uncomplicated cases. In the past two decades, the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of perforated appendicitis to take the advantages of minimally invasiveness has increased. This article reviewed the prevalence, approaches, safety disclaimers, perioperative and postoperative outcomes of the laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of patients with perforated appendicitis. Special issues including the conversion, interval appendectomy, laparoscopic approach for elderly or obese patient are also discussed to define the role of laparoscopic treatment for patients with perforated appendicitis.

Laparoscopic surgery:A qualified systematic review

AIM: To review current applications of the laparoscopic surgery while highlighting the standard procedures across different fields.METHODS: A comprehensive search was undertaken using the Pub Med Advanced Search Builder. A total of 321 articles were found in this search. The following criteria had to be met for the publication to be selected: Review article, randomized controlled trials, or metaanalyses discussing the subject of laparoscopic surgery. In addition, publications were hand-searched in the Cochrane database and the high-impact journals. A total of 82 of the findings were included according to matching the inclusion criteria. Overall, 403 full-text articles were reviewed. Of these, 218 were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 185 relevant articles were identified matching the search criteria for an overview of the current literature on the laparoscopic surgery. Articles covered the period from the first laparoscopic application through its tremendous advancement over the last several years. Overall, the biggest advantage of the procedure has been minimizing trauma to the abdominal wall compared with open surgery. In the case of cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, the procedure has become the gold standard without being proven as a superior technique over the open surgery in randomized controlled trials. Faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, and a quicker return to normal activities are the most evident advantages of the laparoscopic surgery. Positive outcomes, efficiency, a lower rate of wound infections, and reduction in the perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive procedures have been shown in most indications. CONCLUSION: Improvements in surgical training and developments in instruments, imaging, and surgical techniques have greatly increased safety and feasibility of the laparoscopic surgical procedures.

小儿经脐单部位阑尾切除术与腹腔镜阑尾切除术的疗效对比

目的比较经脐单部位阑尾切除术与腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗小儿急性阑尾炎的疗效。方法回顾性分析我科收治的162例14岁以下急性阑尾炎患儿的临床资料,根据手术不同将患儿分为经脐单部位手术组(n=59)与腹腔镜组(n=103)。记录患儿手术完成情况,比较2组患儿手术时间、术中出血量、胃肠道功能恢复时间、住院费用、住院时间、并发症发生情况等,观察患儿术后切口愈合情况。术后随访6个月,观察患儿切口感染、腹痛、腹胀、呕吐及大便异常等情况。结果腹腔镜组患儿手术均顺利完成,无中转开腹病例;经脐单部位组患儿有2例因查找阑尾困难,术中经脐部联用腹腔镜查找阑尾。经脐单部位手术组患儿手术时间、住院时间较均短于腹腔镜组(P<0.05)。2组患儿住院费用、术中出血量、胃肠道功能恢复时间、并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。经脐单部位手术组患儿术后切口愈合更美观。随访期间,2组患儿切口均愈合良好,并未出现腹痛、腹胀、呕吐及大便异常等。结论与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术比较,经脐单部位阑尾切除术具有操作简单、手术时间和住院时间短、切口愈合更美观等优点。

单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜在治疗儿童急性阑尾炎中的疗效对比研究

目的:比较单孔腹腔镜与传统三孔腹腔镜手术治疗儿童急性阑尾炎的效果。方法:回顾性分析2022年1—9月于南通大学附属医院小儿外科收治的急性阑尾炎患儿的临床资料,根据手术方法分为传统多孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy,CLA)组(30例)和单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy,SILA)组(30例),对两组患儿的术前一般资料、术后恢复情况及随访结果进行比较。结果:两组患儿在性别、年龄、BMI、WBC计数、CRP等术前一般资料,术后疼痛评分、住院时间、并发症发生率及住院总费用等方面,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);SILA组手术时长较CLA组略高,但差异无统计学意义;SILA孔组的术后外观满意度明显优于CLA组(P<0.05)。结论:SILA与CLA临床疗效等同,在外观满意度上更具优势,是治疗儿童急性阑尾炎更为理想的手术方法。

腹腔镜下经脐单部位阑尾切除术治疗小儿阑尾炎的效果及对炎症因子的影响

目的:探究腹腔镜下经脐单部位阑尾切除术治疗小儿阑尾炎的效果及对炎症因子的影响。方法:回顾性分析2022年3月至2023年6月期间我院就诊的阑尾炎患儿的临床资料,从接受腹腔镜下经脐单部位阑尾切除术的患儿中采用随机数字表法随机抽取55例纳入观察组,从接受采取传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗的患儿中采用随机数字表法随机抽取50例纳入对照组。比较两组患儿的手术相关指标、术后恢复情况和术后并发症发生情况。并比较术前和术后5d的阑尾炎症状缓解情况[阑尾炎炎症反应(appendicitis inflammatory response,AIR)评分、视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale,VAS)评分],比较术前、术后48h和术后5d的炎症因子水平。结果:观察组患儿的手术时间、术中出血量、术后首次排气时间、体温恢复正常时间、下床活动时间、住院时间、术后并发症发生率均低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后5d,两组患儿的AIR评分和VAS评分较术前降低,且观察组降低幅度大于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。重复测量方差分析显示两组患者术后的时点效应、组间效应及时点和组间的交互效应均可影响CRP、PCT、WBC水平的变化(P<0.05),且观察组低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:腹腔镜下经脐单部位阑尾切除术治疗小儿阑尾炎具有积极效果,减少术后并发症,降低炎症因子水平,有助于患儿快速恢复。

对比腹腔镜阑尾切除术与传统开腹阑尾切除术的临床效果

目的 对比腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)与传统开腹阑尾切除术(OA)的效果。方法 我院于2020年1月至2023年12月开展研究,共计100例阑尾切除手术患者参与研究,根据手术方法不同分为LA组(50例,腹腔镜阑尾切除术)与OA组(50例,传统开腹阑尾切除术),研究指标为预后时间、免疫功能、炎症因子、疼痛评分、并发症数据、切口恢复满意情况。结果 LA组拔管时间、住院时间均短于OA组(均P <0.05)。术前1 d,两组免疫功能相关指标差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05);术后7 d,LA组免疫功能相关指标优于OA组(P <0.05)。治疗前,两组炎症因子指标差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05);治疗后,LA组炎症因子指标优于OA组(P <0.05)。LA组术后3 d、术后7 d疼痛评分均低于OA组(均P <0.05)。LA组术后并发症发生率为0低于OA组8.00%(P <0.05)。LA组术后切口恢复满意度96.00%高于OA组80.00%(P <0.05)。结论 LA与OA手术均能够治疗急性阑尾炎患者,前者能够改善患者预后情况,减少手术对患者免疫功能影响,降低患者术后炎症反应,手术风险更小,患者对术后切口恢复更加满意。

不同气腹压下的腹腔镜阑尾切除术对急性阑尾炎患儿应激反应、胃肠功能的影响

目的探讨急性阑尾炎患儿给予不同气腹压下的腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)对应激反应、胃肠功能的影响。方法选取2020年7月至2022年2月在九江市妇幼保健院接受LA治疗的90例急性阑尾炎患儿作为研究对象,采用随机数字表法分成A组(30例)、B组(30例)、C组(30例),A组术中二氧化碳(CO_(2))气腹压维持在8.0~9.0 mmHg,B组维持在>9.0~10.0 mmHg,C组维持在>10.0~11.0 mmHg,比较三组术野清晰度、应激反应及胃肠功能、局部疼痛。结果B组患儿的术野清晰度总优良率高于A组、C组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.017);A组、C组患儿术野清晰度总优良率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.017)。三组患儿T_(0)时的促肾上腺皮质激素(ACTH)、皮质醇(Cor)水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);三组患儿T_(1)、T_(2)时的ACTH、Cor水平均高于本组T_(0)时,T_(2)时的ACTH、Cor水平均低于本组T_(1)时,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);但B组T_(1)、T_(2)时的ACTH、Cor水平均低于A组、C组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组、C组T_(1)、T_(2)时的ACTH、Cor水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。B组患儿的肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门首次排气、排便时间均短于A组、C组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组、C组患儿肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门首次排气、排便时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。B组患儿局部疼痛评估总优良率高于A组、C组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.017);A组、C组患儿局部疼痛评估总优良率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.017)。结论急性阑尾炎患儿给予>9.0~10.0 mmHg气腹压下的LA,能够改善术野清晰度,促使胃肠功能恢复,对应激反应影响更小,局部疼痛感轻。

ERAT与LA治疗成人急性无并发症性阑尾炎疗效及安全性的Meta分析

目的 比较内镜逆行阑尾炎治疗术(ERAT)和腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)治疗成人急性无并发症性阑尾炎的临床疗效及安全性差异。方法 检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Embase、中国生物医学文献数据库(SinoMed)、中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据库和中国科学期刊数据库自建立之日起至2022年12月1日采用ERAT与LA治疗成人急性无并发症性阑尾炎的随机对照研究、回顾性研究和前瞻性研究。采用RevMan5.3软件对最终统计的数据进行Meta分析。采用统计量I2评估研究的异质性。通过固定效应或随机效应模型计算95%置信区间(CI)的优势比(OR)、加权平均差(WMD)。结果 ERAT组的手术时间(WMD=-19.46,95%CI:-27.36~-11.55,P<0.001)、术后体温恢复正常时间(WMD=-0.92,95%CI:-1.13~-0.71,P<0.001)、白细胞计数降至正常时间(WMD=-1.79,95%CI:-2.55~-1.02,P<0.001)、术后持续卧床时间(WMD=-1.77,95%CI:-2.34~-1.20,P<0.001)、术后住院时间(WMD=-2.77,95%CI:-3.63~-1.91,P<0.001)均短于LA组,且并发症(OR=0.26,95%CI:0.12~0.54;P=0.000 3)发生率更低。结论 相较于LA,ERAT治疗成人急性无并发症性阑尾炎更具优势。不仅减少了患者的痛苦,节约了医疗资源,还保留了阑尾的生物学功能,具有较大的临床推广及应用价值。

Appendiceal bleeding caused by vascular malformation: A case report

BACKGROUND Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding(LGIB)is a common occurrence in clinical practice.However,appendiceal bleeding is an extremely rare condition that can easily be overlooked and misdiagnosed.The preoperative detection of appen-diceal bleeding often poses challenges due to the lack of related guidelines and consensus,resulting in controversial treatment approaches.CASE SUMMARY We presented a case of a 33-year-old female who complained of hematochezia that had lasted for 1 d.Colonoscopy revealed continuous bleeding in the appen-diceal orifice.A laparoscopic appendectomy was performed immediately,and a pulsating blood vessel was observed in the mesangium of the appendix,accor-dingly,active bleeding into the appendicular lumen was considered.Pathological examination revealed numerous hyperplastic vessels in the appendiceal mucosa and dilated capillary vessels.CONCLUSION The preoperative detection of appendiceal bleeding is often challenging,colo-noscopy is extremely important,bowel preparation is not routinely recommend-ed for patients with acute LGIB or only low-dose bowel preparation is recom-mended.Laparoscopic appendectomy is the most appropriate treatment for appendiceal bleeding.

内镜下逆行阑尾炎治疗术、腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎脓肿患者的效果及对机体免疫功能的影响

目的对比内镜下逆行阑尾炎治疗术(ERAT)、腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)治疗急性阑尾炎(AA)脓肿患者的效果及对机体免疫功能的影响。方法回顾性分析2021年5月至2023年5月该院收治的80例AA脓肿患者的病历资料,按手术方案不同分A组和B组,每组40例。A组接受ERAT治疗,B组接受LA治疗。对比两组恢复指标水平(包括体温复常时间、下床活动时间、手术时间、胃肠功能恢复时间、术中失血量)、术前及术后1 d视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分、胃肠激素[胃泌素(GAS)、血管活性肠肽(VIP)、胃动素(MTL)]、免疫功能(CD3^(+)T淋巴细胞比例、CD4^(+)T淋巴细胞比例、CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)比值)水平,以及并发症发生率。结果A组体温复常时间、下床活动时间、手术时间、胃肠功能恢复时间均短于B组,术中失血量少于B组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组术后1 d VAS评分低于B组(P<0.05);A组术后1 d血清GAS、MTL水平高于B组,血清VIP水平低于B组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组术后1 d CD3^(+)T淋巴细胞比例、CD4^(+)T淋巴细胞比例和CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)比值高于B组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组并发症总发生率为2.50%(1/40),明显低于B组的20.00%(8/40),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论与LA相比,ERAT治疗AA脓肿患者的优势更为突出,不仅能进一步优化手术及术后恢复指标,减少并发症,减轻术后疼痛程度,且对机体胃肠及免疫功能影响更小。

右美托咪定联合枸橼酸芬太尼注射液对腹腔镜阑尾切除术的镇痛效果

目的:探究右美托咪定联合枸橼酸芬太尼注射液对腹腔镜阑尾切除术患者的镇痛效果。方法:选取高安市人民医院2022年1月—2023年12月接收的114例腹腔镜阑尾切除术患者,按照随机数字表法分为对照组、观察组,各57例。两组均进行腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗,对照组接受枸橼酸芬太尼注射液麻醉,观察组接受右美托咪定联合枸橼酸芬太尼注射液麻醉。比较两组生命体征(平均动脉压和心率)、炎症因子[C反应蛋白(CRP)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)]、疼痛程度[视觉模拟评分法(VAS)]和舒适度程度[舒适度评分(BCS)]、不良反应发生率。结果:术后6 h,观察组平均动脉压和心率均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后24 h,观察组CRP、IL-6、TNF-α水平均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后6、12、24、48 h,观察组VAS评分均低于对照组,BCS评分均高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:右美托咪定联合枸橼酸芬太尼注射液能显著优化腹腔镜阑尾切除术后的镇痛管理,提升舒适度,降低炎症反应,未增加不良反应风险。

腹横肌平面阻滞联合舒芬太尼对腹腔镜阑尾切除术患者术后镇痛的影响

目的:探讨腹横肌平面阻滞联合舒芬太尼对腹腔镜阑尾切除术患者术后镇痛的影响。方法:选取瑞金市人民医院麻醉科2021年8月—2023年7月收治的94例行腹腔镜阑尾切除术患者,按照随机数字表法将所有患者分为试验组(n=47)、对照组(n=47)。试验组术毕实施双侧腹横肌平面阻滞+舒芬太尼自控镇痛,对照组术毕采用舒芬太尼自控镇痛。观察两组舒芬太尼用量、术后首次下地时间和进食时间,术后视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分,以及炎症反应指标和不良反应发生情况。结果:试验组舒芬太尼用量少于对照组,术后首次下地时间、进食时间均早于对照组(P<0.05)。试验组术后12、24、36 h VAS评分均低于对照组(P<0.05)。术后3 d两组TNF-α、CRP水平均升高,试验组TNF-α、CRP水平均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组不良反应发生率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:腹横肌平面阻滞联合舒芬太尼应用于腹腔镜阑尾切除术后患者,镇痛作用显著,还可减轻炎症反应。