Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-effectiveness of Outpatient Surgery for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The PENDI-CSI Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of outpatient appendectomy in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. BACKGROUND: Given that acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdomen, the introduction of outpatient appendectomy protocols could significantly improve the effectiveness and sustainability of health care systems. METHODS: A total of 300 patients were enrolled from October 2018 to June 2021 in the PENDI-CSI randomized clinical trial: 149 were assigned to the outpatient surgery (OPS) group and 151 to the inpatient surgery (IPS) group, followed by 1 month postoperatively. All patients were aged older than 14 years and had uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, neoplasms, inflammatory bowel disease, and high anesthetic risk (ASA IV). The OPS group was discharged from the postanesthesia care unit while the IPS group was admitted. RESULTS: In total, 128 patients in the OPS group (85.9%) were discharged without admission. Predictors whether patients in the OPS group had to be admitted were aged over 31 years [relative risk (RR): 2.42 (1.04-5.65)], hypertension [RR: 6.21 (3.22-11.97)], anesthetic risk II-III [RR: 2.63 (1.17-5.94)], previous abdominal surgery [RR: 3.34 (1.55-7.20)], postoperative pain with visual analog scale >6 [RR: 4.28 (2.67-6.86)], and postoperative fear [RR: 2.2 (1.04-4.67)]. There were no differences in terms of complications, readmissions, and reinterventions, and the perceived quality was similar in both groups. The outpatient modality produced savings of €1 034.97 per patient ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient appendectomy is safe and effective for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patient-perceived quality is similar to that of IPS, although it successfully reduces hospital costs compared with inpatient appendectomy.

Is laparoscopic TAPP the preferred approach for the treatment of inguinal hernia? Technique, indications and future perspectives.

The repair of inguinal hernia is one of the most frequently performed surgeries in General Surgery units. The laparoscopic approach for these hernias will be clearly considered as the gold standard, based on its advantages over the open approach. There are no clear advantages of the transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) over the totally preperitoneal approach (TEP), although it has been shown to be more reproducible, presenting a shorter learning curve, although it presents more possibilities of developing trocar site hernias. Laparoscopic TAPP could be superior to TEP in the following indications: incarcerated hernias, emergencies, previous preperitoneal surgery, previous Pfanestiel-type incision, recurrent hernias, inguinoscrotal hernias and obese, being also a better alternative for females. Robotic TAPP is a safe approach with similar results to laparoscopy; however, it is related to an increase in costs and operating time. The value of this technology for the repair of complex hernias (multiple recurrences, inguino-scrotal or after previous preperitoneal surgery) remains to be determined, since they represent a certain challenge for the conventional laparoscopic approach. On the other hand, robotic repair of inguinal hernias may be a way to reduce the learning curve before addressing complex ventral hernias. Finally, artificial intelligence applied to the laparoscopic approach to inguinal hernia will undoubtedly have a significant impact in the future especially to determine the best the indications for this approach, on the performance of a safer technique, on the correct selection of meshes and fixation mechanisms, and on learning curve.

Influence of Preoperative Educational Intervention for Patients Undergoing Fecal Ostomy Surgery: A Comparison Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: This aim of this study was to compare the impact on hospital stay and short-term overall complications prior to and following the introduction of an outpatient preoperative ostomy education program to an existing inpatient ostomy education program. DESIGN: A comparison cohort study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: One hundred thirty-eight consecutive patients undergoing ostomy surgery were included. One group (n = 65, 47%) was given an experimental preoperative ostomy education intervention, along with standard care including a postoperative educational intervention during the initial hospital course. A second group (n = 73, 53%) received the same standardized education in the postoperative period. Data were collected from a single tertiary center located in Seville, Spain, during a 12-month period between July 2014 and June 2015. METHODS: Data were collected in 2 phases. Data from participants undergoing postoperative (standard) education were collected retrospectively. Data for the group receiving preoperative education were collective prospectively. Outcome variables were postoperative length of stay, surgical complications (severity was assessed by the Clavien-Dindo grading system), subsequent interventions, and readmission rates. RESULTS: Analysis indicated no differences between the average length of postoperative hospital stay (12.32 days in the preoperative education group vs 12.76 days in the postoperative education group, P = .401). In contrast, overall complications, mortality, and readmission rates were significantly higher in the preoperative education program group (P = .027, P = .047, and P = .046, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Delivering a standardized educational intervention during the preoperative period versus postoperative education delivery during the ostomy surgery hospital course did not reduce length of stay. Analysis indicated that overall complications, mortality, and readmission rates were significantly higher in the preoperative education program group but we hypothesize that intervening factors may have influenced these outcomes.

Full endoscopic minimally invasive extraperitoneal modified Sugarbaker approach for para-colostomy hernia repair: Technical aspects and 2-year follow-up results of a prospective cohort.

AIM: This study aimed to assess technical aspects and clinical results of a new minimally invasive technique in parastomal hernia (PSH) repair, full endoscopic retromuscular access, after 2 years of follow-up. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients requiring minimally invasive ventral PSH repair were collected from 2019 to 2022. The inclusion criteria were patients aged between 18 and 80 years old with symptomatic PSH. Demographics and perioperative and postoperative data were collected. Postoperative pain and functional recovery were compared with preoperative data. RESULTS: Twelve patients with symptomatic PSH were included. The mean PSH defect area was 16.2 cm2 and the mean midline defect was 8.7 cm2 . No intra-operative complications or conversion to open surgery were detected. One patient (8%) required postoperative readmission due to partial bowel obstruction symptoms that required catheterization of the stoma. Pain significantly worsened after the first postoperative day compared to preoperative data but improved after the first postoperative month compared to the first postoperative week and after the 90th postoperative day compared to the first postoperative month, with significant differences. Significant restriction improvement was identified when 30 days after surgery data were compared to preoperative data and when the 180th postoperative day results were compared to 30 days after surgery. The average follow-up was 29 months. During the follow-up no clinical or radiological recurrence was observed. CONCLUSION: This paper shows low rate of intra- and postoperative complications with significant improvement in terms of pain activities restriction compared to preoperatory. After 29 months follow-up, no recurrence was identified, confirming that this approach offers good mid-term results.