↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes and cost-effectiveness

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes and cost-effectiveness
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13017-016-0102-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Biondi, Carla Di Stefano, Francesco Ferrara, Angelo Bellia, Marco Vacante, Luigi Piazza

Abstract

Appendectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed in emergency surgery. Because of lack of consensus about the most appropriate technique, appendectomy is still being performed by both open (OA) and laparoscopic (LA) methods. In this retrospective analysis, we aimed to compare the laparoscopic approach and the conventional technique in the treatment of acute appendicitis. Retrospectively collected data from 593 consecutive patients with acute appendicitis were studied. These comprised 310 patients who underwent conventional appendectomy and 283 patients treated laparoscopically. The two groups were compared for operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rate, return to normal activity and cost. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter hospital stay (2.7 ± 2.5 days in LA and 1.4 ± 0.6 days in OA), with a less need for analgesia and with a faster return to daily activities (11.5 ± 3.1 days in LA and 16.1 ± 3.3 in OA). Operative time was significantly shorter in the open group (31.36 ± 11.13 min in OA and 54.9 ± 14.2 in LA). Total number of complications was less in the LA group with a significantly lower incidence of wound infection (1.4 % vs 10.6 %, P <0.001). The total cost of treatment was higher by 150 € in the laparoscopic group. The laparoscopic approach is a safe and efficient operative procedure in appendectomy and it provides clinically beneficial advantages over open method (including shorter hospital stay, decreased need for postoperative analgesia, early food tolerance, earlier return to work, lower rate of wound infection) against only marginally higher hospital costs. NCT02867072 Registered 10 August 2016. Retrospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 216 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 19%
Student > Postgraduate 23 11%
Student > Master 16 7%
Other 14 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 27 13%
Unknown 82 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 <1%
Computer Science 2 <1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 <1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 87 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,816,829
of 24,483,002 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#51
of 585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,199
of 343,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,483,002 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.