A prospective observational study of the utility of early diagnostic laparoscopy for right lower abdominal pain: a safe and effective diagnostic and therapeutic tool

Abstract

Background and aims

Diagnostic laparoscopy is commonly performed for diagnosis of right lower abdominal pain and its use is increasing in the emergency setting. Some studies have reported that diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic appendicectomy have advantages over conventional surgery. Many emergency surgeons now perform diagnostic laparoscopy for both clinically diagnosed appendicitis and when the diagnosis is in doubt. The aim of the present study was to assess whether the use of diagnostic laparoscopy is justified and safe for those admitted with right lower abdominal pain.

Methods and results

Data were collected prospectively on consecutive patients attending the acute surgical receiving unit with right iliac fossa pain or a suspected diagnosis of acute appendicitis. A total of 284 patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy. Of them 233 (82%) had a positive finding at laparoscopy, 207 (88%) underwent appendicectomy, the majority of which were carried out laparoscopically. Surgical trainees performed the majority of operations and this did not have a negative impact on operative findings (p 0.856), operation performed (0.642), or operative duration (0.831). No intra-operative complications were sustained. Ultrasound examination was carried out in 49 patients, while CT was carried out in 24.

Conclusion

The results of the present study highlight the utility of early diagnostic laparoscopy as both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the acute setting.

Keywords

Diagnostic laparoscopy appendicitis right iliac fossa pain

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Addiss

et al.

The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 132: 910–925.

Korner

et al.

Incidence of acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: age-specific and sex-specific analysis. World J Surg 1997; 21: 313–317.

Andersson

Hugander

Ghazi

et al.

Why does the clinical diagnosis fail in suspected appendicitis?

Eur J Surg 2000; 166: 796–802.

Puylaert

et al.

A prospective study of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of appendicitis. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 666–669.

Galindo Gallego

et al.

Evaluation of ultrasonography and clinical diagnostic scoring in suspected appendicitis. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 37–40.

Kim

et al.

Low-dose abdominal CT for evaluating suspected appendicitis. New Eng J Med 2012; 366: 1596–1605.

Cobben

et al.

A simple MRI protocol in patients with clinically suspected appendicitis: results in 138 patients and effect on outcome of appendectomy. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 1175–1183.

Al-Khayal

Al-Omran

. Computed tomography and ultrasonography in the diagnosis of equivocal acute appendicitis. A meta-analysis. Saudi Med J 2007; 28: 173–180.

Kalan

et al.

Evaluation of the modified Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a prospective study. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1994; 76: 418–419.

10.

Bijnen

et al.

Implications of removing a normal appendix. Dig Surg 2003; 20: 215–221.

11.

Guller

et al.

Negative appendicectomy and perforation rates in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected appendicitis. Br J Surg 2011; 98: 589–595.

12.

Sauerland

Jaschinski

Neugebauer

. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (10): CD001546–CD001546.

13.

Domínguez

et al.

Early laparoscopy for the evaluation of nonspecific abdominal pain: a critical appraisal of the evidence. Surg Endosc 2011; 25: 10–18.

14.

SAGES, S.o.A.G.a.E.S. Guidelines for diagnostic laparoscopy practice/clinical guidelines. 2007.

15.

Maggio

et al.

Early laparoscopy versus active observation in acute abdominal pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2008; 6: 400–403.

16.

Paterson

et al.

Changing trends in surgery for acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 2008; 95: 363–368.

17.

Rao

et al.

Helical CT technique for the diagnosis of appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a focused appendix CT examination. Radiology 1997; 202: 139–144.

18.

Mathews

et al.

Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 2013; 346: f2360–f2360.

19.

Markar

et al.

Increased use of pre-operative imaging and laparoscopy has no impact on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing appendicectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2011; 93: 620–623.

20.

Garbarino

Shimi

. Routine diagnostic laparoscopy reduces the rate of unnecessary appendicectomies in young women. Surg Endosc 2009; 23: 527–533.

21.

Larsson

et al.

Laparoscopy reduces unnecessary appendicectomies and improves diagnosis in fertile women. A randomized study. Surg Endosc 2001; 15: 200–202.

22.

Stechman

Roy

Mainprize

. Current practice in the United Kingdom for the use of diagnostic laparoscopy in suspected acute appendicitis. Colorectal Dis 2009; 11: 817–820.

23.

Wei

Macdonald

Shimi

. Appendicectomy is associated with increased pregnancy rate: a cohort study. Ann Surg 2012; 256: 1039–1044.

24.

Whitworth

et al.

Value of diagnostic laparoscopy in young women with possible appendicitis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1988; 167: 187–190.

25.

Paterson-Brown

Vipond

. Modern aids to clinical decision-making in the acute abdomen. Br J Surg 1990; 77: 13–18.

26.

Paterson-Brown

. Emergency laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 279–283.

27.

Cuesta

Borgstein

Meijer

. Laparoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of acute abdominal conditions. Clinical review. Eur J Surg 1993; 159: 455–456.

28.

Vander Velpen

Shimi

Cuschieri

. Diagnostic yield and management benefit of laparoscopy: a prospective audit. Gut 1994; 35: 1617–1621.

29.

Borgstein

et al.

Acute appendicitis – a clear-cut case in men, a guessing game in young women. Surg Endosc 1997; 11: 923–927.

30.

Graat

et al.

Appendectomy by residents is safe and not associated with a higher incidence of complications: a retrospective cohort study. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 715–719.

31.

Scarborough

Bennett

Pappas

. Defining the impact of resident participation on outcomes after appendectomy. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 577–582.