Conventional appendectomy versus laparoscopic by SUS: a descriptive and tranverse study on hospitalizations in Brazil

• Autor(a) principal: Jurema, Hugo Guilherme de Moraes
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Mostardeiro, Lucas Rodrigues, Menezes, Letícia Oliveira de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Saúde (Santa Maria)
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufsm.br/revistasaude/article/view/45310
• topic: Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Laparoscopic surgery; Epidemiology; Health Services Research.; Apendicite; Apendicectomia; Cirurgia laparoscópica; Epidemiologia; Pesquisa sobre Serviços de Saúde.

For more than a century, conventional (open) appendectomy was the only standard treatment for appendicitis. However, the videolaparoscopic approach (VLP), a contemporary and more sophisticated technique, has revolutionized the management of this pathology. Objective: this study aims to carry out a descriptive and cross-sectional analysis of hospital admissions for conventional and laparoscopic appendectomy performed by SUS in Brazil. Methods: this is a descriptive and cross-sectional study, carried out through the analysis of secondary data, from the Hospital Information System (SIH), on appendectomies (conventional and laparoscopic) that occurred in the Unified Health System (SUS), in the Brazil, from 2009 to 2018. Results: videolaparoscopic surgery showed a lower number of deaths from procedures, a lower mortality rate and a higher cost per hospitalization, compared to conventional surgery. The average length of days of hospital stay had no statistically significant difference between the techniques. In addition, for both techniques (either open or VLP), the data suggest an increasing increase in the total number and average value of hospitalization. As for the temporal evolution, for both techniques, the numbers suggest a decreasing rate for the average hospital stay and the mortality rate. Final considerations: video appendectomy at SUS presented more assistance and financial advantages, suggesting that funding policies and incentives to expand the realization of this method be created, compared to the open method.