Márquez M, Ayala M, Palacios F

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 142-144
PDF size: 226.17 Kb.

ABSTRACT

A retrospective trial was performed to analyze laparoscopic appendectomy at Ignacio Zaragoza ISSSTE Hospital. Appendicitis became recognized as a surgical disease when pathologist Hebert Fitz read his 257 analyses of perforating inflammation of appendix at the meeting of american physicians. It was not until 1894 that Charles McBurney described the surgical incision that bears his name and the technic of appendectomy that was to become the gold standard treatment for appendicitis for 20th and 21st centuries. Fifty patients with a median age of 32 years (range 12-77 years) were analyzed. One day was the mean hospital stay for 26 patients (52%), two days for 15 patients (30%), and three days for 5 patients (10%). Two patients (4%) was converted to open surgery for intra-abdominal adhesions, 4% (2 patients) was also converted for complicated appendicitis who make impossible the conclusion in laparoscopic approach. 10% (5 patients) had complicated appendicitis, while 90% (45 patients) had no complicated appendicitis. No one reported abscess or fistula. Approach advantages means explore all the peritoneal cavity, to treat other pelvic pathologies (especially in women), to minimize postoperative pain and ileus and can reduce almost zero to postoperative site infection and postincisional hernias.

REFERENCES

1. Meade RH. An introduction to the history of general surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders 1968.

2. Thomas CG. Classic description of disease. Springfield;1932.

3. Amyand C. Of an inguinal rupture, with a pin in the appendix caeci, incrusted with stone, and some observations on wounds in guts. Philos trans R Soc London 1736;39:329-342.

4. Tait L. Surgical treatment of typhlitis. Birmingham Med Rev 1890;27: 26-34.

5. Fitz RH. Perforating inflammation of the vermiform appendix; with special reference tp its early diagnosis and treatment. Am J Med Sci 1886; 92: 312-346.

6. McBurney CM. Experience with early operative interference in cases of disease of vermiform appendix. NY Med J 1889;50: 676-684.

7. Blind PJ. Dahlgren ST. The continuing challenge of the negative appendix. Acta Chir Scand 152: 623, 1986.

8. Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, et al. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 132:910.

9. Fragoso MC. Acute appendicitis: A clinicopathological analysis of 200 cases] - Rev Gastroenterol Mex - 01-OCT-1993; 58(4): 342-5

10. Emil S. Risk of rupture in appendicitis. J Am Coll Surg - 01-AUG-2006; 203(2): 265-6

11. Carr NJ. The pathology of acute appendicitis. Ann Diagn Pathol 2000; 4:46.

12. Andersson RE. Meta-analysis of the clinical and laboratory diagnosis of appendicitis. Br J Surg 2004; 91:28.

13. Ohmann C, Yang Q, Franke C. Diagnostic scores for acute appendicitis. Abdominal Pain Study Group. Eur J Surg 1995; 161:2