1 / 130

Laparoscopy in Infants and Children: What’s New?

Laparoscopy in Infants and Children: What’s New?. George W. Holcomb, III, M.D., MBA Surgeon-in-Chief Children’s Mercy Hospital Kansas City, MO. Pediatric Laparoscopy. Appendicitis. Do We Need to Operate? Adult Studies .

beck
Download Presentation

Laparoscopy in Infants and Children: What’s New?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Laparoscopy in Infants and Children:What’s New? George W. Holcomb, III, M.D., MBA Surgeon-in-Chief Children’s Mercy Hospital Kansas City, MO

  2. Pediatric Laparoscopy

  3. Appendicitis

  4. Do We Need to Operate?Adult Studies • Park HC, Kim BS, Lee BH: Efficacy of short-term antibiotic therapy for consecutive patients with mild appendicitis. Am Surg 2011; 77:752-755. • Lien WC, Lee WC, Wang HP, Chen YC, Liu KL, Chen CJ. Male gender is a risk factor for recurrent appendicitis following nonoperative treatment. World J Surg 2011; 35:1636-1642 • Turhan AN, Kapan S, Kütükcü E, Yiğitbas H, Hatipoğlu S, Aygün E. Comparison of operative and non operative management of acute appendicitis. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2009; 15:459-462. • Hansson J, Körner U, Khorram-Manesh A, Solberg A, Lundholm K. Randomized clinical trial of antibiotic therapy versus appendicectomy as primary treatment of acute appendicitis in unselected patients. Br J Surg. 2009; 96:473-481. • Vons C, Barry C, Maitre S, et al . Amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid versus appendicectomy for treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011; 377:1573-1579.

  5. Do We Need to Operate? • In the adult literature, non-operative management with antibiotics for both acute and perforated appendicitis is successful as primary definitive therapy in up to 70% of patients. • About 20-30% will fail antibiotic management and will need an operation.

  6. Appendicitis

  7. Operation at Presentation Versus The Following Day Yardeni D, Hirschl RB, Drongowski RA, et al: Delayed versus immediate surgery in acute appendicitis: Do we need to operate during the night? J Pediatr Surg 39:464-469, 2004. • Retrospective comparison in children (Level 3 study) between operation < 6 hrs after presentation or the following day • 126 patients (38 early vs 88 late) • No differences in operating time, perforation rate, or complications

  8. When to Operate?Current Practice at CMH • Patients identified with appendicitis are booked for laparoscopic appendectomy • All receive a dose of rocephin (50mg/kg) and flagyl (30mg/kg) • This antibiotic regimen was shown to be most cost effective in a PRT • If the patient presents at night, the operation is scheduled for the ‘surgeon of the week’ the next day (8 am or 1 pm start) • Appendectomies rarely occur after 10 PM at night

  9. How do we manage the child presenting with an abscess due to perforated appendicitis?

  10. Appendicitis with Abscess • 5 - 7 day history • Dehydrated – needs IVF • Percutaneous drainage (interventional radiology) • PICC line - antibiotics • Discharge day 3-5 if stable • Antibiotics con’t 10 - 14 days at home • Return 8-10 wk. for interval appendectomy (to prevent recurrent appendicitis) - overnight hospitalization

  11. Abscess StudyProspective Trial • Drainable abscess • OR for laparoscopic appendectomy vs percutaneous drainage as initial management • Drain groups undergo laparoscopic appendectomy at 10 weeks. • Quality of life surveys at admission, at 2 weeks and at 12 weeks • Pilot study – 40 patients APSA 2009 J Pediatr Surg 45:236-240, 2010

  12. Initial Non-Op Mgmt vs Lap Appendectomy in Children Presenting with an Abscess Values are expressed as mean ± SD APSA 2009 J Pediatr Surg 45:236-240, 2010

  13. Initial Non-Op Mgmt vs Lap Appendectomy in Children Presenting with an Abscess Values are expressed as mean ± SD, unless otherwise indicated APSA 2009 J Pediatr Surg 45:236-240, 2010

  14. Prospective Randomized Trial • Conclusion – There is no difference b/w initial laparoscopic operation vs initial non-operative management followed by laparoscopic interval appendectomy • Management can be determined by the surgeon’s preference and experience APSA 2009 J Pediatr Surg 45:236-240, 2010

  15. Should we irrigate and suction the abdominal cavity for perforated appendicitis?

  16. Introduction • The debate over irrigation of the peritoneal cavity has persisted over the past century • Comparative data in patients with perforated appendicitis are limited and confined to the era of open surgical approaches • Therefore, our group conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing irrigation to no irrigation during laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis

  17. Study Population Inclusion Criteria • Under 18 years of age • Perforated appendicitis at the time of appendectomy • Stool in the abdomen • Hole in the appendix Exclusion Criteria • Severe concomitant process ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  18. Methods Sample Size • Primary outcome variable – post-operative abscess • Sample size calculation utilized the known and stable abscess rate from our previous trials for perforated appendicitis (20%) • Power = 0.80 and α = 0.05 • 110 patients in each arm ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  19. Operations • Operations were performed by 8 pediatric surgeons at a single institution • The on call surgeon staffed the operation • Allotment had no influence on operating surgeon ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  20. Interventions Irrigation • 1 Liter bag of normal saline attached to the suction/irrigator • Minimum irrigation volume of 500cc Suction Only • No bag attached to the suction/irrigator Battery Powered Suction Irrigator Used in All Cases ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  21. ResultsPatient Demographics Age (years) Weight (kg) BMI (%tile) Gender (% male) 9.7 +/- 3.6 41.2 +/- 19.8 65.0 +/- 32.3 59.1% 10.4 +/- 3.8 41.5 +/- 18.8 60.7 +/- 31.9 52.7% 0.17 0.92 0.36 0.89 Irrigation (n = 110) No Irrigation (n = 110) P Value ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  22. ResultsInitial Presentation Days Symptoms Admit Temp (ºC) WBC 3.1 +/- 2.1 37.8 +/- 1.0 17.1 +/- 5.9 3.1 +/- 2.0 37.8 +/- 0.9 17.3 +/- 5.0 0.99 0.90 0.79 P Value No Irrigation (n = 110) Irrigation (n = 110) ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  23. ResultsOutcomes P Value No Irrigation (n = 110) Irrigation (n = 110) Abscess (%) Op Time (mins) Initial PO’s (days) Reg Diet (hrs) Narcotic Doses Days of Stay Charges ($K) 19.1% 38.7 +/- 14.9 2.6 +/- 1.5 3.4 +/- 1.7 11.4 +/- 5.4 5.5 +/- 3.0 48.1 +/- 20.1 18.3% 42.8 +/- 16.7 2.5 +/- 1.3 3.5 +/- 1.5 11.6 +/- 6.3 5.4 +/- 2.7 48.1 +/- 18.2 1.0 0.06 0.70 0.63 0.76 0.93 0.97 ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  24. Location Of Postoperative Abscesses 14.3 14.6 4.8 1.8 31.0 29.1 4.8 7.3 47.3 45.3 No Irrigation Irrigation ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  25. Conclusions There is no advantage to irrigation of the peritoneal cavity over suction alone during laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis ASA 2012 Ann Surg 256:581-585, 2012

  26. Is there a clinical advantage to performing the laparoscopic appendectomy through a single umbilical incision?

  27. SSULS Appendectomy

  28. Postoperative Appearance

  29. Prospective Randomized Trial Single Umbilical Incision vs 3-PortLaparoscopic Appendectomy • 360 total patients • Acute non-perforated appendicitis • August 09 – November 10 • Primary outcome variable – postoperative wound infection • Standardized pre and postoperative management • Quality of life surveys at 6 weeks and 18-24 months ASA 2011 Ann Surg 254:586-590, 2012

  30. Patient Characteristics at Operation ASA 2011 Ann Surg 254:586-590, 2012

  31. Outcome Data ASA 2011 Ann Surg 254:586-590, 2012

  32. Other Outcomes ASA 2011 Ann Surg 254:586-590, 2012

  33. Convalescence Following Discharge ASA 2011 Ann Surg 254:586-590, 2012

  34. Subset Analysis • BMI% for age & gender: overweight 85-95%, obese >95% • Compared normal to overweight and normal to obese within each group • Compared single site to 3 port within each body habitus classification IPEG 2012 JLAST 22:404-407, 2012

  35. Technique Comparison For Overweight IPEG 2012 JLAST 22:404-407, 2012

  36. Technique Comparison For Obese IPEG 2012 JLAST 22:404-407, 2012

  37. Conclusions • Obesity increases operating time, postoperative length of stay, doses of narcotics, and hospital charges with single site lap appendectomy • Obesity has no impact in 3 port appendectomy • Clinically significant increase in wound infection in overweight and obese patient undergoing single site lap appendectomy • We do not recommend single site laparoscopic appendectomy in obese patients IPEG 2012 JLAST 22:404-407, 2012

  38. Is there a cosmetic advantage to performing the laparoscopic appendectomy through a single umbilical incision?

  39. Postoperative Appearance3 Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy

  40. Methods APSA 2013 • Patients enrolled in the trial completed the PSAQ (Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire) • Survey was obtained from: • Patients 12 years or older • Parents of patients less than 12 years old • PSAQ completed in early and late follow up • Early - 6 weeks post-op clinic visit • Late - after at least 18 months post-op by phone call

  41. Methods • PSAQ - 4 validated subscales • Appearance • Consciousness • Satisfaction with Appearance • Satisfaction with Symptoms • Each question has 4 point response from least to most favorable • Sum of the scores within each subscale was used for comparison between groups APSA 2013

  42. Results APSA 2013

  43. Results PSAQ Scores: Early Follow Up (6 weeks) APSA 2013

  44. Results PSAQ Scores: Late Follow Up (18-32 months) APSA 2013

  45. Conclusions The short-term results demonstrate significantly more favorable perception of scar scores with the single-incision approach At two years, these differences largely vanish Long term follow-up responses approach best possible scores in both groups Our group now utilizes the single site approach in non-overweight/obese children with non-perforated appendicitis, and we have a low threshold for additional ports if needed APSA 2013

  46. AppendicitisSummary • There have been significant changes in the surgical management of appendicitis • These changes have revolved around timing of surgery and the almost exclusive use of the laparoscopic approach • Long-term, there is no cosmetic advantage for the single-incision approach c/w the three-port operation • Unclear if appendicitis will be a surgical disease in the future

  47. Gallbladder Disease

  48. Biliary Dyskinesia • Symptomatic biliary colic w/o stones • Reduced GBEF and pain with CCK stimulation • Has become the most common reason for cholecystectomy in many U.S. centers • IU study – 37 pts – 71% resolution of symptoms • GBEF < 15% successful resolution of symptoms (O.R. – 8.00) (J Pediatr Surg 39:813-816, 2004) • Chronic cholecystitis seen on histological examination of many specimens

  49. Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy • 2006 – 2011 - CHA • 82 children • Chronic cholecystitis – 60% • Long-term symptom relief: 44% • EF < 15%: symptom resolution

More Related