Entrenamiento en laparoscopia y apendicitis / Training in laparoscopy and appendicitis

Introducción. Para la formación en laparoscopia, la apendicectomía es la intervención más utilizada, por su alta frecuencia y, habitualmente, escasa dificultad. Sin embargo, durante la curva de aprendizaje (las primeras 35 intervenciones), el número de complicaciones puede aumentar, con lo que el beneficio de la formación se puede convertir en perjuicio para algunos pacientes. Por ello hemos revisado las complicaciones graves de las apendicectomías laparoscópicas realizadas en nuestro Servicio antes y después de la curva de aprendizaje y las hemos comparado entre sí y con las de las apendicectomías abiertas. Material y métodos. Se han revisado las complicaciones graves (abscesos intraabdominales, oclusiones, hemorragias, etc..) de las 1.710 apendicectomías realizadas en nuestro centro desde 1997 hasta 2013, divididas en tres grupos: abiertas (AA, n = 1.258), laparoscópicas durante la curva de aprendizaje (LDC, n = 154) y laparoscópicas tras la curva de aprendizaje (LTC, n = 298). Se han dividido en apendicitis simples (n = 1.233) y peritonitis (n = 477). Resultados. En el grupo AA se detectaron 110/1.258 complicaciones graves (8,7%), en el grupo LDC 28/154 (18,2%) y en el grupo LTC, 19/298 (6,4%) (p< 0,05 LDC vs AA y LTC). En las apendicitis simples las complicaciones fueron 13/889 (1,5%), en las AA 3/115 (2,6%) en el grupo LDC, y 2/229 en el grupo LTC (0,9%) (p = ns LDC vs AA y LTC). En las peritonitis las complicaciones fueron 97/369 (26,3%) en las AA, 25/39 (64%) en el grupo LDC y 17/69 (24,6%) en el grupo LTC (p< 0,05 LDC vs AA y LTC). Conclusiones. La apendicectomía laparoscópica con fines formativos debería reservarse a los casos de apendicitis simples

Background. In order to improve laparoscopic skills, appendectomy is the most common procedure because of its high frequency and low difficulty. In spite of that, during the learning curve (each surgeon´s first 35 interventions) the incidence of complications may increase, so improvement in training means a bigger risk for some patients. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed major complications (intra-abdominal abscess, intestinal occlusion, hemorrhage) of 1,710 appendectomies performed at our service between 1997 and 2013. We divided them in three groups: open appendectomy (OA, n= 1,258), laparoscopic appendectomy during the learning curve (LDC, n= 154) and laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve (LAC, n= 298). In addition, we distinguish between simple appendicitis (n= 1,233) and peritonitis (n= 477). Results. In the OA group we detected110/1,258 major complications (8.7%), 28/154 major complications (18.2%) in the LDC group and 19/298 (6.4%) in the LAC group (p< 0.05 LDC vs OA and LAC). In the simple appendicitis group, we found 13/889 major complications (1.5%) in OA, 3/115 (2.6%) in LDC group and 2/229 (0.9%) in LAC group (p= ns LDC vs OA and LAC). In the peritonitis group, 97/369 (26.3%) major complications were found in OA group, 25/39 (64%) in LDC group and 17/69 (24.6%) in LAC group (p< 0.05 LDC vs OA and LAC). Conclusions. Educational purpose laparoscopic appendectomy must be used in simple appendicitis cases

[Training in laparoscopy and appendicitis]. / Entrenamiento en laparoscopia y apendicitis.

BACKGROUND: In order to improve laparoscopic skills, appendectomy is the most common procedure because of its high frequency and low difficulty. In spite of that, during the learning curve (each surgeon´s first 35 interventions) the incidence of complications may increase, so improvement in training means a bigger risk for some patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed major complications (intra-abdominal abscess, intestinal occlusion, hemorrhage) of 1,710 appendectomies performed at our service between 1997 and 2013. We divided them in three groups: open appendectomy (OA, n= 1,258), laparoscopic appendectomy during the learning curve (LDC, n= 154) and laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve (LAC, n= 298). In addition, we distinguish between simple appendicitis (n= 1,233) and peritonitis (n= 477). RESULTS: In the OA group we detected110/1,258 major complications (8.7%), 28/154 major complications (18.2%) in the LDC group and 19/298 (6.4%) in the LAC group (p<0.05 LDC vs OA and LAC). In the simple appendicitis group, we found 13/889 major complications (1.5%) in OA, 3/115 (2.6%) in LDC group and 2/229 (0.9%) in LAC group (p= ns LDC vs OA and LAC). In the peritonitis group, 97/369 (26.3%) major complications were found in OA group, 25/39 (64%) in LDC group and 17/69 (24.6%) in LAC group (p<0.05 LDC vs OA and LAC). CONCLUSIONS: Educational purpose laparoscopic appendectomy must be used in simple appendicitis cases.

INTRODUCCION: Para la formación en laparoscopia, la apendicectomía es la intervención más utilizada, por su alta frecuencia y, habitualmente, escasa dificultad. Sin embargo, durante la curva de aprendizaje (las primeras 35 intervenciones), el número de complicaciones puede aumentar, con lo que el beneficio de la formación se puede convertir en perjuicio para algunos pacientes. Por ello hemos revisado las complicaciones graves de las apendicectomías laparoscópicas realizadas en nuestro Servicio antes y después de la curva de aprendizaje y las hemos comparado entre sí y con las de las apendicectomías abiertas. MATERIAL Y METODOS: Se han revisado las complicaciones graves (abscesos intraabdominales, oclusiones, hemorragias, etc..) de las 1.710 apendicectomías realizadas en nuestro centro desde 1997 hasta 2013, divididas en tres grupos: abiertas (AA, n= 1.258), laparoscópicas durante la curva de aprendizaje (LDC, n= 154) y laparoscópicas tras la curva de aprendizaje (LTC, n= 298). Se han dividido en apendicitis simples (n= 1.233) y peritonitis (n= 477). RESULTADOS: En el grupo AA se detectaron 110/1.258 complicaciones graves (8,7%), en el grupo LDC 28/154 (18,2%) y en el grupo LTC, 19/298 (6,4%) (p<0,05 LDC vs AA y LTC). En las apendicitis simples las complicaciones fueron 13/889 (1,5%), en las AA 3/115 (2,6%) en el grupo LDC, y 2/229 en el grupo LTC (0,9%) (p= ns LDC vs AA y LTC). En las peritonitis las complicaciones fueron 97/369 (26,3%) en las AA, 25/39 (64%) en el grupo LDC y 17/69 (24,6%) en el grupo LTC (p>;0,05 LDC vs AA y LTC). CONCLUSIONES: La apendicectomía laparoscópica con fines formativos debería reservarse a los casos de apendicitis simples.

[Sleep disorders in Parkinson's disease: insomnia and sleep fragmentation, daytime hypersomnia, alterations to the circadian rhythm and sleep apnea syndrome]. / Trastornos del sueño en la enfermedad de Parkinson: insomnio y fragmentación del sueño, hipersomnia diurna, alteraciones del ritmo circadiano y síndrome de apnea del sueño.

INTRODUCTION: Sleep disorders in Parkinson's disease are present in 60-98% of patients and reduce their quality of life. AIMS: To review the pathophysiology, diagnostic approach and management of the different sleep disorders. DEVELOPMENT: We describe the pathophysiology associated with neurodegeneration, due to symptoms (motor and nonmotor) and drug therapies. This article reviews insomnia, excessive daytime sleepiness, circadian sleep disorders and sleep apnea. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective or objective sleepiness assessment should routinely be performed by physicians looking after Parkinson's disease patients. Management is difficult and should be targeted to the specific sleep disorder and its likely cause.

[Laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve]. / La apendicectomía laparoscópica más allá de la curva de aprendizaje.

BACKGROUND: Despite its increasing popularity, laparoscopic appendectomy does not put an unanimous end to the answer to the best treatment for appendicitis. Although the postoperative stay is shorter, the wound infection practically does not exist and scars are minimal, some publications question its advantages due to the incidence of intra-abdominal absceses, postoperative analgesia requirements and the recently described "postlaparoscopic appendectomy complication" (PLAC), an intra-abdominal infection, without abscess formation, which develops after laparoscopic appendectomy for non-complicated appendicitis. Some of this series include the "learning curve", wherein they compare results of inexperienced surgeons in laparoscopic techniques with those obtained after with the firmly established open appendectomy (OA) technique. With the aim to clarify this aspects, we reviewed our experience in laparoscopic appendectomy during (LDC) and after (LAC) the "learning curve" and we compared their complications with the open appendectomies' ones. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 807 appendectomies: 208 laparoscopic (LA) and 599 open (OA) from January 2001 to December 2007 performed in our hospital. In the laparoscopic group, 83 of them (40%) were done during the learning curve (each surgeon's 35 first interventions, LDC) and 125 (60%) after the learning curve (LAC). We have compared both laparoscopic subgroups to each other and to the open appendectomies group. We analysed the age, sex, length of stay, kind of appendicitis (simple or perforated appendicitis) and five of the most serious complications: intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative intestinal occlusion, intestinal perforation, haemorrhage and PLAC. RESULTS: The mean age (9 years), sex (58% men; 42% women) and the peritonitis rate (30%) were similar among the 3 groups. The mean length of stay was reduced from 5.4 days in OA group to 4.2 days in LA group and 3.6 days in LAC group (p < 0.01). The simple appendicitis cases had the shortest length of stay: 3.41 days in OA group and 2.16 days in LA group (p < 0.0001). There were no differences in stay for the peritonitis group. In the OA group, we detected 56 severe complications (9,3%): 49 abcesses, 2 occlusions, 2 PLAC, 1 haemorrhage, 1 intestinal perforation and 1 liver abscess. Nineteen severe complications were found in LDC group (22,9%): 9 abscesses, 4 occlusions, 4 haemorrhages, 1 intestinal perforation and 1 PLAC (p < 0.01 vs OA group). In the LAC group, we found 13 complications (10,4%): 9 abscesses, 1 occlusion, 1 PLAC and 2 haemorrhages (p = 0.3 vs OA group). CONCLUSIONS: 1. The length of stay was significantly reduced in laparoscopic appendectomies. 2. Severe complications, particularly intestinal occlusions and haemorrhages, increased significantly during the learning curve, with a slight fluctuation for intra-abdominal abscesses and PLAC. 3. After the learning curve, complications' global rate was similar to the OA group's, with an increment of haemorrhages and occlusions, no variation for PLAC and a slight reduction for intra-abdominal abscesses. 4. In our experience, laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve is the best therapeutic option for acute appendicitis.

La apendicectomía laparoscópica más allá de la curva de aprendizaje / Laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve

Introducción. Aunque la apendicectomía laparoscópica (AL) va ganando en popularidad no termina de ser considerada como la mejor opción para el tratamiento de la apendicitis. Si bien es cierto que la estancia hospitalaria es más corta, que la infección de la herida prácticamente no existe y que las cicatrices son mejores, algunos trabajos cuestionan sus ventajas en aspectos tales como el dolor postoperatorio, la frecuencia de abscesos intraabdominales y la recientemente descrita “complicación post-apendicectomía laparoscópica“ (CPAL), una infección intraabdominal, sin formación de absceso, tras una apendicectomía laparoscópica no complicada. Algunos de esos estudios incluyen la “curva de aprendizaje”, y comparan los resultados obtenidos por cirujanos sin mucha experiencia laparoscópica con los de la bien establecida técnica de la apendicectomía abierta (AA). Con el objetivo de aclarar alguno de estos aspectos hemos revisado las complicaciones graves de las AL durante la curva de aprendizaje (LDC) y tras la curva de aprendizaje (LTC) y las hemos comparado con las de las apendicectomías abiertas (AA). Material y Método. Entre 2001 y 2007 se han realizado 208 AL, 83 de ellas durante la curva de aprendizaje (35 primeras intervenciones por cirujano, LDC) y 125 tras la curva de aprendizaje (LTC). En el mismo período se practicaron 599 AA por el mismo equipo. Hemos comparado los dos grupos laparoscópicos entre ellos y con las AA. Hemos analizado la edad, sexo, estancia, tipo de apendicitis (simple o peritonitis) y cinco complicaciones graves: absceso intraabdominal, oclusión postoperatoria, hemorragia, perforación intestinal y CPAL. Resultados. La edad media (9 a.), el sexo (58% niños, 42% niñas) y el porcentaje de peritonitis (30%) fueron similares en los tres grupos. La estancia media se redujo de 5,4 días en el grupo AA a 4,2 d. en el grupo LDC y a 3,6 d. en el grupo LTC (p<0,01). En las apendicitis simples la diferencia fue mayor: 3,41 d. en las abiertas y 2,16 d. en el grupo LTC (p<0,0001). En las peritonitis no hubo diferencias en la estancia. En el grupo AA se detectaron 56 complicaciones graves (9,3%): 49 abscesos, 2 oclusiones, 1 hemorragia, 2 CPAL, 1 perforación intestinal y 1 absceso intrahepático. En el grupo LDC hubo 19 complicaciones graves (22,9%): 9 abscesos,4 hemorragias, 4 oclusiones, 1 perforación intestinal y 1 CPAL ( p< 0,01 vs AA) En el grupo LTC se detectaron 13 complicaciones (10,4%): 9 abscesos, 1 oclusión, 1 CPAL y 2 hemorragias ( p= 0,3, n.s. vs AA). Conclusiones:1. La estancia media se redujo de manera significativa en las apendicectomías laparoscópicas. 2. Durante la curva de aprendizaje las complicaciones graves aumentaron significativamente, sobre todo las hemorragias y las oclusiones, sin variación en los abscesos intraabdominales y en la CPAL. 3. Tras la curva de aprendizaje el porcentaje global de complicaciones fue similar al de las apendicectomías abiertas, con aumento leve de hemorragias, oclusiones, igual incidencia de CPAL y descenso leve de los abscesos intraabdominales.4. En nuestra experiencia, la apendicectomía laparoscópica más allá de la curva de aprendizaje es la mejor opción para el tratamiento de las apendicitis agudas (AU)

Background. Despite its increasing popularity, laparoscopic appendectomy does not put an unanimous end to the answer to the best treatment for appendicitis. Although the postoperative stay is shorter, the wound infection practically does not exist and scars are minimal, some publications question its advantages due to the incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses, postoperative analgesia requirements and the recently described “postlaparoscopic appendectomy complication” (PLAC), an intra-abdominal infection, without abscess formation, which develops after laparoscopic appendectomy for non-complicated appendicitis. Some of this series include the “learning curve”, wherein they compare results of inexperienced surgeons in laparoscopic techniques with those obtained after with the firmly established open appendectomy (OA) technique. With the aim to clarify this aspects, we reviewed our experience in laparoscopic appendectomy during (LDC) and after (LAC) the “learning curve” and we compared their complications with the open appendectomies’ ones. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 807 appendectomies: 208 laparoscopic (LA) and 599 open (OA) from January 2001 to December 2007 performed in our hospital. In the laparoscopic group, 83 of them (40%) were done during the learning curve (each surgeon’s 35 first interventions, LDC) and 125 (60%) after the learning curve (LAC).We have compared both laparoscopic subgroups to each other and to the open appendectomies group. We analysed the age, sex, length of stay, kind of appendicitis (simple or perforated appendicitis) and five of the most serious complications: intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative intestinal occlusion, intestinal perforation, haemorrhage and PLAC Results. The mean age (9 years), sex (58% men; 42% women) and the peritonitis rate (30%) were similar among the 3 groups. The mean length of stay was reduced from 5.4 days in OA group to 4.2 days in LA group and 3.6 days in LAC group (p<0.01). The simple appendicitis cases had the shortest length of stay: 3.41 days in OA group and 2.16 days in LA group (p<0.0001). There were no differences in stay for the peritonitis group. In the OA group, we detected 56 severe complications (9,3%): 49 abscesses, 2 occlusions, 2 PLAC, 1 haemorrhage, 1 intestinal perforation and 1 liver abscess. Nineteen severe complications were found in LDC group (22,9%): 9 abscesses, 4 occlusions, 4 haemorrhages, 1 intestinal perforation and 1 PLAC (p<0.01 vs OA group).In the LAC group, we found 13 complications (10,4%): 9 abscesses, 1 occlusion, 1 PLAC and 2 haemorrhages (p=0.3 vs OA group). Conclusions: 1. The length of stay was significantly reduced in laparoscopic appendectomies.2. Severe complications, particularly intestinal occlusions and haemorrhages, increased significantly during the learning curve, with a slight fluctuation for intra-abdominal abscesses and PLAC. 3. After the learning curve, complications’ global rate was similar to the OA group’s, with an increment of haemorrhages and occlusions, no variation for PLAC and a slight reduction for intra-abdominal abscesses. 4. In our experience, laparoscopic appendectomy after the learning curve is the best therapeutic option for acute appendicitis (AU)