[Matched-pair analysis comparing laparoscopic (LA) vs. single-port appendectomy (SP) for initial assessment of a new...

By minimising the invasiveness of a surgical intervention, a reduction of operative trauma can be achieved.

The aim of this study was based on a theoretical approach to investigate (i) the feasibility of the SP approach and its overall costs, and, furthermore, (ii) the patients' outcome based on simple perioperative parameters available in daily clinical practice. Therefore, single-port (SP) and laparoscopic appendectomies (LA) were compared using a matched-pair analysis. As a prediction, an absolute match between the criteria histology, sex and ASA stage was required.

From 01/01/2009 to 12/31/2010, 196 (60 % were females) consecutive patients underwent appendectomy. Out of them, in 23 patients with either SP or LA appendectomy the predictions for matched-pair analysis (congruence in histopathological finding, sex and ASA criteria) were fulfilled. The operating time was the target criterion for the feasibility of the new surgical method (SP), which could be shortened as seen by comparing SP No. 1-10 with 11-23 (54.6 ± 19.8 min vs. 28.5 ± 18.9 min) expressing the typical effect of a learning curve. The times were similar to those for LA. The postoperative hospital stay and complication rate used to appropriately assess patient outcome did not show a significant difference if comparing SP and LA. Based on the use of single ports, which can be re-used (which has been also a further target) in SP (34.8 %) at the end of the investigation period, SP and LA can be considered comparable surgical techniques with regard to operating times, middle-term outcome and general costs.

SP is (in case of well-developed laparoscopic expertise) a surgical method that can be easily inaugurated and considered as a feasible approach in daily surgical practice; it is comparable to LA with regard to outcome and general costs. Based on this, SP can be gradually added to the spectrum of surgical procedures in clinical practice and can be performed in suitable cases. A further systematic institutional or even country-wide case register appears to be recommendable to recruit a larger case number and, thus, to achieve a better knowledge on the perioperative management as well as the especially interesting long-term outcome for an appropriate assessment of treatment quality.