Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy versus double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A 1-year randomized controlled trial

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Management of appendicitis has evolved dramatically in the last 120 years, from McBurney's large incision to minimally invasive laparoscopic appendectomy to hardly noticeable incisions with SILS. As a bridge between conventional laparoscopic surgery and SILS, double-incision laparoscopic surgery further minimizes the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery by reducing the number of incisions. This study aimed to establish the efficacy of double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (DILA) as an alternative to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy. METHODS: A total of 60 patients were divided randomly into two groups: the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) group and the DILA appendectomy group. Demographics, diagnostic history, additional intraoperative findings, and duration of operation were recorded. Postoperative pain after 6 h and 24 h and cosmetic outcome after the surgery were also evaluated. Statistical analysis was done using Fisher's exact test, χ2 test, and Student's t-test. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in demographic and clinical characteristics in either group (P > 0.05). No significant difference in mean postoperative pain was observed between the two groups at 6 h (P = 0.62) or 24 h (P = 0.484). However, patients in the DILA group were more satisfied with their cosmetic outcomes than those in the CLA group (P = 0.04). The mean operative time was 26.4 min in the CLA group and 27.6 min in the DILA group (P = 0.62). CONCLUSION: DILA can be performed with operative outcomes that are equivalent to CLA but with superior cosmetic outcomes.