Comparison of treatment methods in plastron appendicitis: a tertiary center experience

IF 17.7 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-01-17 DOI:10.4314/mmj.v35i4.5
Kayhan Ozdemir, Ahmet Tarık Harmantepe, U. Dulger, E. Gonullu, Enis Dikicier, Z. Bayhan, F. Altıntoprak
{"title":"Comparison of treatment methods in plastron appendicitis: a tertiary center experience","authors":"Kayhan Ozdemir, Ahmet Tarık Harmantepe, U. Dulger, E. Gonullu, Enis Dikicier, Z. Bayhan, F. Altıntoprak","doi":"10.4314/mmj.v35i4.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundIt is controversial which treatment method is superior in plastron appendicitis and the research is still going on. The aim of this study is to compare treatment methods for plastron appendicitis in the adult population with our experience. Materials and MethodsThe data of 92 patients who were diagnosed with plastron appendicitis in university hospital between 2015 and 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Data were taken from the hospital database. The patients were divided into three groups: those treated with primary surgery, with interval appendectomy and only with conservative method.Results Interval appendectomy resulted in a lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to primary surgery, shorter operative time, and lower complication rates. Surgical procedures were found to be superior in detecting neoplasms compared to conservative treatment. After conservative treatment, one of three patients was retreated with the diagnosisof acute appendicitis.ConclusionIn plastron appendicitis, routine interval appendectomy can be performed due to its advantages over other treatments such as the frequency of attacks after conservative treatment, the risk of the tumor being overlooked in conservative treatment, and the high rate of complications and conversion to open surgery in the primary surgery group.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":" 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":17.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/mmj.v35i4.5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundIt is controversial which treatment method is superior in plastron appendicitis and the research is still going on. The aim of this study is to compare treatment methods for plastron appendicitis in the adult population with our experience. Materials and MethodsThe data of 92 patients who were diagnosed with plastron appendicitis in university hospital between 2015 and 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Data were taken from the hospital database. The patients were divided into three groups: those treated with primary surgery, with interval appendectomy and only with conservative method.Results Interval appendectomy resulted in a lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to primary surgery, shorter operative time, and lower complication rates. Surgical procedures were found to be superior in detecting neoplasms compared to conservative treatment. After conservative treatment, one of three patients was retreated with the diagnosisof acute appendicitis.ConclusionIn plastron appendicitis, routine interval appendectomy can be performed due to its advantages over other treatments such as the frequency of attacks after conservative treatment, the risk of the tumor being overlooked in conservative treatment, and the high rate of complications and conversion to open surgery in the primary surgery group.
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
板状阑尾炎治疗方法的比较:一家三级医疗中心的经验
背景哪种治疗方法更适合腹腔镜阑尾炎尚存争议,相关研究仍在继续。本研究的目的是根据我们的经验,比较成人腹腔镜阑尾炎的治疗方法。材料与方法回顾性分析了 2015 年至 2021 年期间在大学附属医院确诊的 92 例板状阑尾炎患者的数据。数据来自医院数据库。将患者分为三组:初次手术治疗组、间歇性阑尾切除术治疗组和仅采用保守方法治疗组。结果 与初次手术相比,间歇性阑尾切除术导致转为开腹手术的比例更低、手术时间更短、并发症发生率更低。与保守治疗相比,外科手术在发现肿瘤方面更具优势。结论:与其他治疗方法相比,常规间歇性阑尾切除术具有以下优势:保守治疗后发作频繁、保守治疗中肿瘤被忽视的风险以及初级手术组并发症和转为开放手术的比例较高。
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to "Do All Isolated Traumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhages Need to Be Transferred to a Level 1 Trauma Center?" Construction and Application of Nucleic Acids-Based Biomolecular Condensates Chemical Editing of Proteins: From a Specific Residue to Functional Domains. Asymmetric Alkyne Transformation via Gold/Organo Synergistic Catalysis. Function Decoupling and Modular Platform: Emerging Design Principles for MOF Luminescent Sensing.
×
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:604180095
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