A prospective randomized controlled study comparing patient-reported scar evaluation of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

Kyeong Eui Kim, In Soo Cho, Sung Uk Bae, Woon Kyung Jeong, Hyung Jin Kim, Seong Kyu Baek
{"title":"A prospective randomized controlled study comparing patient-reported scar evaluation of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis.","authors":"Kyeong Eui Kim,&nbsp;In Soo Cho,&nbsp;Sung Uk Bae,&nbsp;Woon Kyung Jeong,&nbsp;Hyung Jin Kim,&nbsp;Seong Kyu Baek","doi":"10.7602/jmis.2023.26.2.55","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes and patient-surveyed scar assessments of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) with the outcomes of multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (MPLA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between August 2014 and November 2017, the prospective randomized study comprised 98 patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis and indicated for surgery. Fifty-one patients had MPLA and 47 patients received SPLA. The primary endpoint was the total score of Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) administered to patients 6 weeks after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>SPLA involved a shorter median operative time than MPLA (47.5 minutes vs. 60.0 minutes, <i>p</i> = 0.02). There were no apparent differences in the time before diet tolerance, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication. SPLA patients had shorter total incision length (2.0 cm vs. 2.5 cm, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and required fewer analgesics on the day of surgery than MPLA patients (<i>p</i> = 0.011). The PSAQ favored the SPLA approach, revealing significant differences in total score (48 vs. 55, <i>p</i> = 0.026), appearance (15 vs. 18, <i>p</i> = 0.002), and consciousness (8 vs. 10, <i>p</i> = 0.005), while satisfaction with appearance and symptoms scale did not (<i>p</i> = 0.162 and <i>p</i> = 0.690, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The postoperative scar evaluated by the patient was better with SPLA than with MPLA, and patient satisfaction with the scar was comparable between the two techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":73832,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","volume":"26 2","pages":"55-63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/aa/aa/jmis-26-2-55.PMC10280108.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2023.26.2.55","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes and patient-surveyed scar assessments of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) with the outcomes of multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (MPLA).

Methods: Between August 2014 and November 2017, the prospective randomized study comprised 98 patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis and indicated for surgery. Fifty-one patients had MPLA and 47 patients received SPLA. The primary endpoint was the total score of Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) administered to patients 6 weeks after surgery.

Results: SPLA involved a shorter median operative time than MPLA (47.5 minutes vs. 60.0 minutes, p = 0.02). There were no apparent differences in the time before diet tolerance, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication. SPLA patients had shorter total incision length (2.0 cm vs. 2.5 cm, p < 0.01) and required fewer analgesics on the day of surgery than MPLA patients (p = 0.011). The PSAQ favored the SPLA approach, revealing significant differences in total score (48 vs. 55, p = 0.026), appearance (15 vs. 18, p = 0.002), and consciousness (8 vs. 10, p = 0.005), while satisfaction with appearance and symptoms scale did not (p = 0.162 and p = 0.690, respectively).

Conclusion: The postoperative scar evaluated by the patient was better with SPLA than with MPLA, and patient satisfaction with the scar was comparable between the two techniques.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项前瞻性随机对照研究比较单孔与多孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术对急性阑尾炎患者报告的疤痕评估。
目的:本研究旨在比较单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(SPLA)与多孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(MPLA)的术后结果和患者调查的疤痕评估。方法:2014年8月至2017年11月,该前瞻性随机研究纳入98例诊断为急性阑尾炎并指征手术的患者。51例患者行MPLA, 47例患者行SPLA。主要终点是术后6周患者疤痕评估问卷(PSAQ)的总分。结果:SPLA的中位手术时间比MPLA短(47.5分钟比60.0分钟,p = 0.02)。两组患者的饮食耐受时间、住院时间和术后并发症无明显差异。SPLA患者的总切口长度较MPLA患者短(2.0 cm vs. 2.5 cm, p < 0.01),手术当日所需镇痛药较少(p = 0.011)。PSAQ倾向于SPLA方法,在总分(48比55,p = 0.026)、外观(15比18,p = 0.002)和意识(8比10,p = 0.005)上显示显著差异,而外观和症状量表的满意度则无显著差异(p = 0.162和p = 0.690)。结论:患者评价SPLA术术后瘢痕优于MPLA术,两种术式术后患者对瘢痕的满意度相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute peritonitis caused by a ruptured urachal cyst accompanied by omphalitis in an adult: a case report and literature review. Analyzing the emergence of surgical robotics in Africa: a scoping review of pioneering procedures, platforms utilized, and outcome meta-analysis. Assessment of mechanical bowel preparation prior to nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery era: insights from a national database analysis in the United States. Automated machine learning with R: AutoML tools for beginners in clinical research. Is prophylactic abdominal drainage mandatory in laparoscopic hemicolectomy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1