Prospective nonrandomized study of conventional versus laparoscopic appendectomy

With the introduction of laparoscopic appendectomy a prospective study was started. Patients with suspected appendicitis were selected for conventional appendectomy or laparoscopy according to the preference of the surgeon on call. During a 1-year period 233 patients were included, of whom 97 underwent conventional appendectomy and 136 laparoscopy. Among the patients selected to laparoscopy, laparoscopic appendectomy was carried out in 72 cases, conventional appendectomy in 32, and only diagnostic laparoscopy in the remaining 32. Removal of a normal appendix was significantly more common in the group of patients directly selected for conventional appendectomy compared to laparoscopy (p < 0.01). The duration of the operation was shorter (p < 0.05) and the postoperative hospital stay and the convalescence longer (p < 0.05) with conventional than with laparoscopic appendectomy. Peroperative problems and minor postoperative complications were more common (p < 0.01) with laparoscopic than conventional appendectomy. However, the clinical impact of these problems were limited. The difference between the procedures regarding major complications was not significant. Laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be at least as good as conventional appendectomy. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to decide which of the procedures to recommend.