Comparison of Simple Ligation versus stump Invagination in open Appendectomy

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Feb 25, 2023
Download
PDF 54
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Vol. 2 No. 01 (2023): February

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Farhad Sherzad
Imran Zafarzai
Samiullah Saeed
Gul Aqa Sadat

Abstract

Background: Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most prevalent abdominal crises and faced by the surgeon in practice. The best treatment for the appendicular stump during open appendectomy is unknown. This is a randomized controlled trial comparing simple ligation with appendicular stump invagination.
Materials and Methods: The MASS (Modified Alvarado Score System) test was used to confirm the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. When necessary, an ECG & a chest X-ray were taken. All of the patients were put under spinal anesthesia for the procedure.
Findings: The appendicular stump of 305 patients were treated with simple ligation (161 patients) in group I, and ligation and invagination (144 patients) in group II. “Pyrexia, vomiting, serous discharge, wound infection, peritonitis, residual abscess, and post-operative pain in the right iliac fossa are all comparable after surgery. Paralytic ileus occurred in 2 (1.24%) of patients in groups I and 7(4, 36%) patients in group II, respectively, and was statistically significant.
Conclusion: Easy ligation of the appendicular stump after open appendectomy is advised since it is safe, simple, and takes less time.

Keywords

Acute appendicitis, Appendectomy, Appendicular stump, Simple ligation, Invagination

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Sherzad, F., Zafarzai, I., Saeed, S., & Sadat, G. A. (2023). Comparison of Simple Ligation versus stump Invagination in open Appendectomy. NUIJB, 2(01), 26–32. Retrieved from https://nuijb.nu.edu.af/index.php/nuijb/article/view/19

References

  1. Asif Zaman, R., & Muhammad, T. (2011). Appendicectomy; assessment of caecal invagination of appendicular stump. Professional Medical Journal-Quarterly. 2011; 18 (1): 102-105
  2. Boswell, C. B. (1999). Diseases of appendix. In. Doherty GM, Meko JB, Olson JA, Peplinski GR, Worrall NK eds. The Washington Manual of Surgery, 2, 228-35.
  3. Chhetri, R. K., & Shrestha, M. L. (2005). A comparative study of pre-operative with operative diagnosis in acute abdomen. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ), 3(2), 107-10.
  4. Cooperman, M. (1983). Complications of appendectomy. Surgical Clinics of North America, 63(6), 1233-1247.
  5. Dass, H. P., Wilson, S. J., Khan, S., Parlade, S., & Uy, A. (1989). Appendicectomy stumps:‘to bury or not to bury’. Tropical doctor, 19(3), 108-109.
  6. Delaria, G. A. (1987). Textbook of Surgery—Thirteenth Edition. The Biological Basis of Modern Surgical Practice.
  7. Engström, L., & Fenyö, G. (1985). Appendicectomy: assessment of stump invagination versus simple ligation: a prospective, randomized trial. Journal of British Surgery, 72(12), 971-972.
  8. IA, C., & AA, M. (2005). Is it necessary to invaginate the stump after appendectomy?.
  9. Khan, S. (2010). Assessment of stump invagination versus simple ligation in open appendicectomy. Journal of Institute of Medicine Nepal, 32(1), 7-10.
  10. Körner, H., Söndenaa, K., Söreide, J. A., Andersen, E., Nysted, A., Lende, T. H., & Kjellevold, K. H. (1997). Incidence of acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: age-specific and sex-specific analysis. World journal of surgery, 21, 313-317.
  11. Lavonius, M. I., Liesjärvi, S., Niskanen, R. O., Ristkari, S. K., Korkala, O., & Mokka, R. E. (1996, January). Simple ligation vs stump inversion in appendicectomy. In Annales chirurgiae et gynaecologiae (Vol. 85, No. 3, pp. 222-224).
  12. MS, A., & RU, H. (2006). Appendicectomy: non invagination vs. invagination of appendicular stump. Professional Medical Journal-Quarterly. 2011; 18 (1):
  13. Neves, L. J. V. A., Wainstein, A. J. A., Mathias, W. C., Costa, F. P. D., Castro, J. H. D., & Avassi-Rocha, P. R. (2011). Simple ligation or ligation and purse string invagination for the treatment of the appendiceal stump: a prospective, randomized trial. ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), 24, 15-19.
  14. Rafi, M., Saleem, L. A. M., Ahmad, S., & Haq, R. U. (2006). Appendicectomy; non-invaginaton vs. invagination of appendicular stump. Annals of King Edward Medical University, 12(1).
  15. Schein, M. (2010). Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery, F. Charles Brunicardi, Dana K. Andersen, Timothy R. Billiar, David L. Dunn, John G. Hunter, Jeffrey B. Matthews, Raphael E. Pollock (Eds) McGraw-Hill Professional, New York, 2009, 1888 pp, $143.20, ISBN-10: 007154769X (amazon. com).
  16. Scott-Conner, C. E., Hall, T. J., Anglin, B. L., & Muakkassa, F. F. (1992). Laparoscopic appendectomy. Initial experience in a teaching program. Annals of surgery, 215(6), 660.
  17. SHAHID, C. N., & IBRAHIM, K. (2004). Appendicectomy: Non-invagination vs. invagination of appendicular stump. The Professional Medical Journal, 11(02), 117-120.
  18. Suvera, M. S., Kharadi, A. H., Asari, U. S., Damor, P. B., Shah, M. T., & Patel, M. B. (2013). Open appendicectomy stump: invaginate or not to invaginate. Int J Res Med Sci, 1(3), 248-251.
  19. Tate, J. J. T., Chung, S. C. S., Dawson, J. W., Leong, H. T., Chan, A., Lau, W. V., & Li, A. K. C. (1993). Conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis. British journal of surgery, 80(6), 761-764.

Most read articles by the same author(s)