Prospective randomized comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in men

Michael R. Cox, John L. McCall, James Toouli, Robert T.A. Padbury, Thomas G. Wilson, David A. Wattchow, Mary Langcake

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

127 Citations (Scopus)


A prospective, randomized trial was performed to compare open appendectomy with laparoscopic appendectomy in men with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Sixty-four patients with a median age of 25 years (range 18-84 years) were randomized to open appendectomy (n = 31) or laparoscopic (n = 33) appendectomy. Of the 64 men, 56 (87.5%) had appendicitis (27 open, 29 laparoscopic procedures). The mean operating times were 50.6 ± 3.7 minutes (± SEM) for open and 58.9 ± 4.0 minutes for laparoscopic appendectomy (p = 0.13). Five (15%) patients randomized to laparoscopic appendectomy had an open operation. The mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer for open appendectomy (3.8 ± 0.4 days) than for laparoscopic appendectomy (2.9 ± 0.3 days) (t = 2.05, df = 62, p = 0.045). The complication rate after open appendectomy (25.8%) was not significantly different from that after laparoscopic appendectomy (12.1%). There was a single postoperative death due to a pulmonary embolus in the laparoscopic group and a single death due to cardiac and renal failure in the open group. The mean time to return to normal activities was significantly longer following open appendectomy (19.7 ± 2.4 days) than after laparoscopic appendectomy (10.4 ± 0.9 days), (t = 3.75, df = 49, p = 0.001). In conclusion, laparoscopic appendectomy in men has significant advantages in terms of a more rapid recovery compared to open appendectomy. There were no significant disadvantages to laparoscopic appendectomy compared to open appendectomy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)263-266
Number of pages4
JournalWorld Journal of Surgery
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1996
Externally publishedYes


Dive into the research topics of 'Prospective randomized comparison of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy in men'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this