15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Profile of the appendectomies performed in the Brazilian Public Health System Translated title: Perfil das apendicectomias realizadas no Sistema Público de Saúde do Brasil

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          ABSTRACT Objective: to analyze the profile of appendectomies performed in the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS) and to compare the laparoscopic and laparotomic techniques of appendectomy. Methods: This work used information from DataSus from 2008 to 2014 (http://datasus.saude.gov.br). We compared the data of patients submitted to laparotomic appendectomy with those submitted to laparoscopic one. Results: when comparing the total growth of appendectomies, the laparoscopic route increased 279.7%, while the increase in laparotomic surgery was 25% (p <0.001) in the study period. With regard to medical and hospital costs, laparoscopic appendectomy accounted for only 2.6% of the total expenditure on appendectomies performed by the Unified Health System (SUS) hospitals, with an average cost 7.6% lower than that of laparotomy procedures, but without statistical significance. The mortality rate was 57.1% lower in the laparoscopic approach when compared with laparotomy. Conclusion: there has been a significant increase in the laparoscopic route in the treatment of appendicitis, but the method is still rarely used in SUS patients. The costs of laparoscopic appendectomy were similar to those observed in laparotomic access.

          Translated abstract

          RESUMO Objetivo: analisar o perfil das apendicectomias realizadas no Sistema de Saúde Pública (SUS) do Brasil e comparar as técnicas de apendicectomia, por via laparoscópica e laparotômica. Método: este trabalho utilizou informações do DataSus de 2008 a 2014 (http://datasus.saude.gov.br). Foram comparados os dados dos doentes submetidos à apendicectomia laparotômica com aqueles submetidos à apendicectomia laparoscópica. Resultados: ao se comparar o crescimento total das apendicectomias, a via laparoscópica aumentou 279,7%, enquanto o aumento da cirurgia laparotômica foi 25% (p<0,001) no período do estudo. Com relação aos custos com despesas médicas e hospitalares, a apendicectomia vídeo-laparoscópica representou apenas 2,6% do gasto total em apendicectomias realizadas por hospitais do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) com custo médio 7,6% inferior ao das cirurgias por via laparotômica, porém sem significância estatística. A taxa de mortalidade foi 57,1% menor na via laparoscópica quando comparado com a laparotômica. Conclusão: vem havendo um aumento significativo da via laparoscópica no tratamento das apendicites, mas o método ainda é pouco utilizado nos doentes do SUS. Os custos da apendicectomia laparoscópica se mostraram semelhantes aos observados nos acessos laparotômicos.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Endoscopic appendectomy.

          K. Semm (1983)
          These newly developed endoscopic methods in gynaecology for haemostasis during surgical pelviscopy (Endocoagulation Roeder-loop ligation, endoligature, endo-suture with intra- and extracorporeal knotting) make it possible to carry out appendectomy by endoscopy for any of the following indications: Postoperative adhesion of the appendix especially in "sterility" patients, elongated appendix extending into the small pelvis, endometriosis of the appendix, subacute and chronic appendicitis. The instrument-set employed in this method permits the performance of all the usual classical operative steps (purse-string suture, and Z-suture acc. to McBurney and Sprengel). The point for resection has to be sterilized over 20-30 sec. at 212 degrees F using the crocodile forceps (endocoagulation procedure) before division and extraction of the appendix is effected.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy - a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

            Background Although laparoscopic surgery has been available for a long time and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been performed universally, it is still not clear whether open appendectomy (OA) or laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the most appropriate surgical approach to acute appendicitis. The purpose of this work is to compare the therapeutic effects and safety of laparoscopic and conventional "open" appendectomy by means of a meta-analysis. Methods A meta-analysis was performed of all randomized controlled trials published in English that compared LA and OA in adults and children between 1990 and 2009. Calculations were made of the effect sizes of: operating time, postoperative length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, resumption of diet, complications rates, and conversion to open surgery. The effect sizes were then pooled by a fixed or random-effects model. Results Forty-four randomized controlled trials with 5292 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Operating time was 12.35 min longer for LA (95% CI: 7.99 to 16.72, p < 0.00001). Hospital stay after LA was 0.60 days shorter (95% CI: -0.85 to -0.36, p < 0.00001). Patients returned to their normal activity 4.52 days earlier after LA (95% CI: -5.95 to -3.10, p < 0.00001), and resumed their diet 0.34 days earlier(95% CI: -0.46 to -0.21, p < 0.00001). Pain after LA on the first postoperative day was significantly less (p = 0.008). The overall conversion rate from LA to OA was 9.51%. With regard to the rate of complications, wound infection after LA was definitely reduced (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.59, p < 0.00001), while postoperative ileus was not significantly reduced(OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.47, p = 0.71). However, intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), intraoperative bleeding and urinary tract infection (UIT) after LA, occurred slightly more frequently(OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.43, p = 0.05; OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.54 to 4.48, p = 0.41; OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.58 to 5.29, p = 0.32). Conclusion LA provides considerable benefits over OA, including a shorter length of hospital stay, less postoperative pain, earlier postoperative recovery, and a lower complication rate. Furthermore, over the study period it was obvious that there had been a trend toward fewer differences in operating time for the two procedures. Although LA was associated with a slight increase in the incidence of IAA, intraoperative bleeding and UIT, it is a safe procedure. It may be that the widespread use of LA is due to its better therapeutic effect.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a metaanalysis.

              Currently, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) provides a safe and effective alternative to open appendectomy (OA), but its use remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of LA through a metaanalysis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LA and OA published between January 1992 and February 2010 were included in this study. Strict literature appraisal and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers. A metaanalysis then was performed to evaluate operative time, hospital cost, postoperative complications, length of analgesia, bowel function recovery, day liquid diet began, hospital stay, and return to work and normal activity. The metaanalysis comprised 25 RCTs involving 4,694 patients (2,220 LA and 2,474 OA cases). No significant differences were found between the LA and OA groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), or type of appendiceal inflammation. Compared with OA, LA showed advantages of fewer postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.98; p = 0.04), less pain (length of analgesia: weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.53; 95% CI, -0.91 to -0.15; p = 0.007), earlier start of liquid diet (WMD, -0.51; 95% CI, -0.75 to -0.28; p < 0.0001), shorter hospital stay (WMD, -0.68; 95% CI, -1.02 to -0.35; p < 0.0001), and earlier return to work (WMD, -3.09; 95% CI, -5.22 to -0.97; p = 0.004) and normal activity (WMD, -4.73; 95% CI, -6.54 to -2.92; p < 0.00001), but a comparable hospital cost (WMD of LA/OA ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.40; p = 0.47) and a longer operative time (WMD, 10.71; 95% CI, 6.76-14.66; p < 0.00001). Despite the longer operative time, LA results in less postoperative pain, faster postoperative rehabilitation, a shorter hospital stay, and fewer postoperative complications than OA. Therefore, LA is worth recommending as an effective and safe procedure for acute appendicitis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Journal
                rcbc
                Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
                Rev. Col. Bras. Cir.
                Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões (Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil )
                0100-6991
                1809-4546
                February 2017
                : 44
                : 1
                : 4-8
                Affiliations
                [1] Sao Paulo Sao Paulo State orgnameAnhembi Morumbi University Brazil
                Article
                S0100-69912017000100004
                10.1590/0100-69912017001002
                5090bf02-ce67-442e-afa3-dced0471f06d

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 26 September 2016
                : 03 November 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 16, Pages: 5
                Product

                SciELO Brazil


                Apendicite,Apendicectomia,Laparoscopia,Gastos em Saúde,Appendicitis,Laparoscopy,Appendectomy,Health Expenditures

                Comments

                Comment on this article