Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and open appendectomy. Methods Literatures relating to randomized controlled trials in English and Chinese on the comparison of clinical effectiveness after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in appendicitis from PubMed，Wiley Online Library，Medline，Embase，Cochrane，CNKI，VIP，CBM databases were extracted，and methodological quality was evaluated by two reviewers independently with designed extraction form. The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.2 software was used for data analysis. The wound infection，hospitalization time，operation time，hospitalization expenses，and peritoneal abscess were compared between laparoscopic and open appendectomy. Results Eight published reports of eligible studies were extracted. Compared with the open appendectomy， laparoscopic appendectomy had significant differences in lower wound infection rate 〔OR=0.19，95%CI （0.09，0.38），P＜0.000 01〕， longer operation time 〔WMD=3.66，95%CI （0.50，6.82），P=0.02〕，and more hospitalization expenses〔WMD=503.96，95%CI （337.23，670.70），P＜0.000 01〕.But there were no significant differences in hospitalization time〔WMD=-0.11，95%CI （-3.64，3.43），P=0.95〕 and incidence rate of peritoneal abscess 〔OR=1.40，95%CI （0.23，8.64），P=0.71〕 between laparoscopic and open appendectomy. Conclusions The wound infection rate is lower，but the operation time is longer，the hospitalization expenses is more in laparoscopic appendectomy as compared with open appendectomy. There are no statistically significant differences of hospitalization time and incidence rate of abdominal abscess between laparoscopic and open appendectomy.
ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) for the acute appendicitis patients based on our extensive experiences. MethodsThe data of all the acute appendicitis patients who underwent appendectomy from January 2013 to December 2014 in our department were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 201 patients were enrolled and divided into LA group (n=102) and OA group (n=99). The relevant clinical indexes during and after operation of two groups were compared. ResultsThere were no significant difference in age, gender, and underlying disease between LA and OA patients (P > 0.05). And the abdominal cavity infection rate, abdominal drainage rate and 30-day readmission rate were also similar (P > 0.05). But LA group had less operative time, lower infection operative wound rate, less intestinal function recovery time, shorter inhospital days and higher hospital expenses than OA group (P < 0. 05). In addition, perforated appendix and LA could increase the rate of abdominal drainage[OR=2.710, 95% CI(1.129, 6.507), P=0.026]. ConclusionsBoth LA and OA are safe and effective methods for the treatment of acute appendicitis. But LA has several advantages over OA on less operative time and postoperative complications, earlier recovery, and shorter inhospital days. While LA have higher hospital cost than OA, it still should be considered as a prefer way to cure acute appendicitis. LA is a independent risk factor of abdominal drainage.