Clinical outcomes compared between laparoscopic and open appendectomy in pregnant women

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the initial absolute or relative contraindication of laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy, in the last decade, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been performed in pregnant women. But few studies compare the outcomes of LA compared with open appendectomy (OA). We investigated clinical outcomes to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LA compared with OA in pregnant women. METHODS: We recruited consecutive pregnant patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis who were undergoing LA or OA between May 2007 and August 2011 into the study. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (22 LA and 39 OA) enrolled in our study. There were no significant differences in duration of surgery, postoperative complication rate and obstetric and fetal outcomes, including incidence of preterm labour, delivery type, gestation age at delivery, birth weight and APGAR scores between the 2 groups. However, the LA group had shorter time to first flatus (2.4 ± 0.4 d v. 4.0 ± 1.7 d, p = 0.034), earlier time to oral intake (2.3 ± 1.6 d v. 4.1 ± 1.9 d, p = 0.023) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (4.2 ± 2.9 d v. 6.9 ± 3.7 d, p = 0.043) than the OA group. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a clinically safe and effective procedure in all trimesters of pregnancy and should be considered as a standard treatment alternative to OA. Further evaluation including prospective randomized clinical trials comparing LA with OA are needed to confirm our results.