Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management

A randomized, controlled multicenter feasibility pilot trial on imaging confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis: Appendectomy vs. symptomatic treatment in pediatric patients (the APPSYPP) trial study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Imaging-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis can be effectively and safely treated with antibiotics in most adults and children. Symptomatic treatment may have similar efficacy and safety.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The APPSYPP trial is a randomized national multicenter feasibility superiority pilot study comparing appendectomy with symptomatic treatment in children with imaging-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

1) age ≥ 7 and < 16 years, 2) imaging-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis and 3) CRP ≤ 65 mg/l. Patients are randomized to receive emergency laparoscopic appendectomy or symptomatic treatment. To ensure patient safety, symptomatically treated patients are hospitalized for at least 24 h receiving standard practice intravenous fluids and analgesics according to standard clinical practice. Primary outcome is 30-day treatment success defined by the absence of any treatment failure criteria. In appendectomy, treatment failure is defined as normal appendiceal histopathology or any postintervention complication requiring general anesthesia. In symptomatic treatment, treatment failure is defined as 1) inability for hospital discharge without appendectomy within 48 h after randomization with a finding of histopathologically inflamed appendix, 2) appendectomy during the initial hospital stay due to clinical progression of appendicitis with complicated acute appendicitis both histopathologically and surgically, 3) appendectomy with a histopathological finding of acute appendicitis after hospital discharge, or 4) any complication of appendicitis requiring general anesthesia. Detailed predefined secondary outcomes will be analyzed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Study was approved by Ethics Committee of Helsinki University Hospital (ID:HUS/1993/2021), conducted in compliance with the declaration of Helsinki with results disseminated in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05289713).

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

The costs and benefits of emergent surgical workflow for acute appendicitis in children

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding how operative timing affects patient safety and resource utilization for acute appendicitis. Over 3 years, our institution trialed efforts to optimize appendectomy workflow. Our aim is to describe the ramifications of expediting appendectomy and implementing standardized protocols relative to historic controls.

METHODS

Patient records at a freestanding children's hospital were reviewed from synchronized 6-month periods from 2019 to 2021. During Year 1 (historic), no standardized workflows existed. In Year 2 (expedited), appendicitis management was protocoled using a clinical quality improvement bundle, which included performing appendectomies within two hours of diagnosis. In Year 3 (QI), operative timing was relaxed to the same calendar day while all prior QI initiatives continued. Descriptive statistics were performed, using hospital length of stay (LOS) as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

298 patients underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis. The median expedited workflow LOS was 15.3 hours shorter (p = 0.003) than historic controls; however, this was sustained despite relaxation of surgical urgency in the QI workflow. No differences in perforation rates were observed. During the expedited workflow, OR overtime staffing expense increased by $90,000 with no significant change in hospital costs. In multivariate regression, perforation was the only variable associated with LOS.

CONCLUSION

Hospital LOS can be shortened by expediting appendectomy. However, in our institution this did not decrease hospital costs and was furthermore balanced by higher personnel expenses. A sustained decrease in LOS after relaxing operative urgency standards implies that concurrent QI initiatives represent a more effective and cost-efficient strategy to decrease hospital resource utilization.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Is acute appendicitis complicated or uncomplicated? Approaching the question via computed tomography

Background

The distinction between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis is very important for the selection of the treatment method.

Purpose

To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomography (CT) in differentiating between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis to demonstrate that false negativity in differentiating these cases can be reduced when CT findings are incorporated into the clinical evaluation of patients.

Material and Methods

All patients aged ≥18 years who underwent appendectomy at Malatya Training and Research Hospital in 2020 and 2021 were retrospectively screened. Of them, 283 patients were included in the study who had undergone CT before the operation. Patients with appendicitis were divided into two groups: complicated and uncomplicated, according to the results of their pathology tests. Demographic data, laboratory results, and CT images of the patients were evaluated.

Results

The patients with complicated appendicitis had a significantly higher mean age ( P<0.001). The most common CT findings in patients with complicated appendicitis were moderate or severe peri-appendiceal fat stranding (PFS) and appendix wall enhancement defect (AWD). The findings with the highest sensitivity were PFS (77.9%) and AWD (69.4%). Although abscess, phlegmon, and peri-appendiceal air had the highest specificity (100%), these findings were the ones with the lowest sensitivity. According to the scoring system was developed for the differential diagnosis, CT had a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 79.2%.

Conclusion

Based on the sensitivity and specificity values measured for CT according to the findings of our study, the scoring system may be useful for the differential diagnosis of complicated appendicitis.

A concise pathophysiological model of acute appendicitis against the background of the COVID-19 pandemic

One of the most common clinical pictures has become the focus of attention during the COVID-19 pandemic: acute appendicitis with the associated diagnostics and therapy. The aim of the work is to show inconsistencies with regard to epidemiology, pathophysiology and therapy against the background of the pandemic with special attention to the conditions for children and to explain the pathophysiological processes that are likely to underlie the disease based on scientifically plausible models.

Carcinoid Tumor of the Cecal Appendix

Cecal appendix tumors are unusual and have a low frequency of presentation, which is reported between 0.2 and 0.5% of all digestive tract tumors. From the mentioned tumors, the carcinoid ones are the most common neoplasms of the cecal appendix and are characterized in most cases by slow growth and an asymptomatic clinical course. However, in some cases, they can present as a metastatic disease with fatal outcomes. We report the case of a 24-year-old female patient with a typical case of acute appendicitis, in whom an additional diagnosis of a carcinoid tumor is obtained upon receipt of the pathology report. The prognosis of appendicular carcinoid tumors is good, with a five-year survival rate of 95%-100% and a recurrence rate of less than 1%.

Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score in Acute Appendicitis: A Study at a Tertiary Care Center in North India

Introduction

Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdominal pain. The diagnosis is eminently clinical and the cause is surgically correctable. However, a decision of surgery based on the clinical presentation only has a 15%-30% chance of the removal of a normal appendix. Thus, the diagnosis involves a corroboration of clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings. Appendicitis scoring systems can be considered to expedite the diagnostic and decision-making process.

Aim

The present study was conducted to study the efficacy of Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and its correlation with the histopathological findings.

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care center in North India comprising patients who presented to the surgery department with a provisional diagnosis of acute appendicitis and required appendectomy.

Results

Appendicitis was histopathologically proven in 54 patients. Patients with an AIR score ≥5 were 2.18 times more likely to have appendicitis. The probability of having appendicitis with AIR score ≥5 was 92.16% (positive predictive value). The diagnostic accuracy of AIR score was 82.81%.

Conclusion

AIR score has a high sensitivity and positive predictive value in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. It is a quick and convenient system for clinical evaluation of patients in primary care or peripheral hospitals where advanced facilities such as USG scan or CT scan are not available all the time. The application of this scoring system definitely improves diagnostic accuracy and reduces negative appendectomy rate.

Predicting the Severity of Acute Appendicitis in Children Using Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR)

Introduction

The ability to predict risk of perforation in acute appendicitis (AA) could direct timely management and reduce morbidity. Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are surrogate severity markers in infections. This study investigates the use of PLR and NLR as a marker for distinguishing uncomplicated (UA) and complicated appendicitis (CA) in children.

Materials and methods

This retrospective single-center study collected data between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2020. Children between five and 17 years of age with histologically confirmed appendicitis were included. Cut-off values for NLR and PLR were determined by employing the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with sensitivity and specificity in addition to regression analysis.

Results

A total of 701 patients were included with a median age of 13 years. Out of which 52% of the cohort was female. The difference between the NLR and PLR ratios between UA and CA was significant (p=0.05, Kruskal-Wallis). For UA, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and cut-off for NLR and PLR were 0.741, 3.80 with 95% CI of 0.701-0.781 and 0.660, 149.25 with 95% CI of 0.618-0.703, respectively. In CA, using NLR and PLR, AUC and cut-off were 0.776, 8.86 with 95%CI of 0.730-0.822 and 0.694, 193.67 with 95%CI of 0.634-0.755, respectively. All were significant with p<0.001.

Conclusions

NLR and PLR are reliable, synergistic markers predicting complicated appendicitis which can guide non-operative management in children.

Blood culture positivity in patients with acute appendicitis: A propensity score-matched prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The prevalence of bacteremia in acute appendicitis is unknown. We aimed to assess prevalence and predictive factors of bacteremia in adult patients with appendicitis.

METHODS

In this prospective propensity score-matched cohort study, patients were recruited as part of one single-center prospective observational study assessing appendicitis microbiology in concurrence with two randomized controlled trials on non-operative treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. All patients evaluated for enrollment in these three trials between April 2017 and December 2018 with both a confirmed diagnosis of appendicitis and available blood culture on admission were included in this study. Potential predictive factors of bacteremia (age, sex, body mass index (BMI), body temperature, C-reactive protein (CRP), leukocyte count, comorbidities, symptom duration, and appendicitis severity) were assessed. Prevalence of bacteremia was determined by all available blood cultures followed by propensity score matching using sex, age, BMI, CRP, leukocyte count, and body temperature of the patients without available blood culture.

RESULTS

Out of the 815 patients with appendicitis, 271 patients had available blood culture and the prevalence of bacteremia was 12% (n = 33). Based on propensity score estimation, the prevalence of bacteremia in the whole prospective appendicitis cohort was 11.1%. Bacteremia was significantly more frequent in complicated acute appendicitis (15%; 29/189) compared with uncomplicated acute appendicitis (5%; 4/82) (p = 0.015). Male sex (p = 0.024) and higher body temperature (p = 0.0044) were associated with bacteremia.

CONCLUSIONS

Estimated prevalence of bacteremia in patients with acute appendicitis was 11.1%. Complicated appendicitis, male sex, and higher body temperature were associated with bacteremia in acute appendicitis.

Caveat emptor: The accuracy of claims data in appendicitis research

BACKGROUND

International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes are used to identify patients with appendicitis and classify severity of disease for research and hospital reimbursement. We sought to determine accuracy of International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes in classifying appendicitis as uncomplicated versus complicated (defined as perforated, necrotic, or abscess) compared with the clinical gold standard: surgeon characterization of the appendix in the operative report.

METHODS

Retrospective review of operative reports and discharge International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes for patients ≥18 years old who underwent noninterval, nonincidental appendectomy between January 2012 and December 2019 at a tertiary referral center. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were calculated for International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes to classify appendicitis accurately as complicated compared with surgeon description. ICD-9/10 codes and surgeon description were categorized into complicated/uncomplicated based on the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grading system.

RESULTS

In the study, 1,495 patients with acute appendicitis underwent appendectomy. Per surgeon description, 200 (13%) were complicated and 1,295 (87%) uncomplicated. Compared with surgeon description, discharge International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes did not accurately identify complicated appendicitis: sensitivity = 0.68, positive predictive value = 0.77. As a sensitivity analysis, the cohort was stratified by public versus private payers, and the results did not change.

CONCLUSION

International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes do not accurately identify surgeon-described complicated appendicitis. Nearly one-third of the cases of complicated appendicitis were coded as uncomplicated. Such misclassification negatively impacts reimbursement for complicated appendicitis care and could lead to misleading results in research and quality improvement activities that rely on these codes.

Analysis of appendicitis management during COVID-19 pandemic: A study of Chinese adult cohorts

BACKGROUND

Healthcare seeking behavior has been widely impacted due to the restricted movements of individuals during the Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aims to perform risk stratification in patients requiring timely intervention during the recovery periods.

METHODS

Operation notes of acute appendicitis (AA) patients within a hospital were analyzed during three six-month periods (23 January-23 July in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively). Patient data were collected retrospectively including demographics, pre-emergency status, perioperative information, postoperative outcomes, and follow-up results.

RESULTS

321 patients were included in this study, with 111, 86, and 124 patients in 2019, 2020, and 2021 groups, respectively. The median age of patients decreased by 4 years in 2020 as compared to that in 2019. The proportion of pre-hospitalization symptoms duration of more than 48 h in the 2020 group was higher (36.05% in 2020 vs. 22.52% in 2019). Length of hospital stay (LOS) in 2020 was shorter than it was during the same period in 2019 (4.77 vs. 5.64) and LOS in 2021 was shorter than in 2019 (4.13 vs. 5.64). Compared to the lockdown period, the proportion of patients with recurrent AA was higher in the post-lockdown period (15.1% vs. 27.4%). The median age was 34 years (vaccinated) vs. 37 years (unvaccinated). Logistic regression suggests that elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) (OR = 1.018, CI = 1.010-1.028), white cell count (WBC) (OR = 1.207, CI = 1.079-1.350), female (OR = 2.958, CI = 1.286-6.802), recurrent (OR = 3.865, CI = 1.149-12.997), and fecalith (OR = 2.308, CI = 1.007-5.289) were associated with complicated appendicitis (CA).

CONCLUSION

The lockdown measures during the COVID-19 epidemic are shown to be correlated with a reduction in the proportion of AA patients who underwent surgery, particularly in older adults. Risk factors for CA include elevated CRP, WBC, female, recurrent, and fecalith.

Demonstration of a new entity of non-perforated appendicitis through studying cluster of appendicitis

Differential diagnosis and management for perforated appendicitis and non-perforated appendicitis are current hot topics. The aim of this study is to demonstrate a new entity of non-perforated appendicitis, “acute hemorrhagic appendicitis” through studying cluster of acute appendicitis among Tibetan students at a high school in central China. Over the 11-year period, there were 120 patients with more female patients (102 of 499, 20.4%) than male patients (18 of 474, 3.8%) among 973 Tibetan students. 117 patients’ clinical data were available. Clinical manifestations were identical to classic appendicitis. However, axilla temperature, white blood cell counts and neutrophil level were elevated mildly in 12 (10.3%), 19 (16.2%) and 12 (10.3%) patients respectively. Pathologically, the resected appendices exhibited focal or diffuse hemorrhages in mucosa and/or submucosa, and infiltration by eosinophil and by lymphocytes. No patients had perforated appendicitis. The median time from the onset to surgery was 3 days (IQR, 2–4). All patients were discharged with full recovery. In conclusion, “acute hemorrhagic appendicitis” represented a new entity of non-perforated appendicitis with unique cause and pathogenesis, which might be treated with antibiotics alone or self-limited. Studying the cluster is a reliable method to find new entity of appendicitis.

Hyponatremia-A New Diagnostic Marker for Complicated Acute Appendicitis in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Acute appendicitis in the pediatric population remains a diagnostic challenge for clinicians. Despite many biochemical markers, imaging modalities and scoring systems, initial misdiagnosis and complication rates are high in children. This suggests the need for investigations directed towards new diagnostic tools to aid in the diagnosis. Recent studies have shown a correlation between serum sodium levels and complicated appendicitis. Although the exact reasons for hyponatremia in patients with complicated appendicitis are not known, there is persuasive data to support the role of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 in the non-osmotic release of antidiuretic hormone. This meta-analysis aims to investigate all available data on hyponatremia as a diagnostic marker of complicated appendicitis in the pediatric population. Methods: The literature search was conducted by two independent investigators according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The scientific databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus) were systematically searched for relevant studies using the keywords (hyponatremia) AND (appendicitis) AND (children). The methodological quality was assessed using a validated scale, and RevMan 5.4 software was utilized for pooled analysis. Results: Seven studies were included in the final meta-analysis, five of which were retrospective. A total of 1615 and 2808 cases were distributed into two groups: group A with complicated appendicitis and group B with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, respectively. The studies compared serum sodium levels of patients among the groups. Pooling the data demonstrated significantly lower serum sodium levels in children with complicated appendicitis vs. the non-complicated appendicitis (WMD: −3.29, 95% CI = −4.52 to −2.07, p < 0.00001). The estimated heterogeneity among the included studies was substantial and statistically significant (I2 = 98%, p < 0.00001). Conclusion: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that hyponatremia has potential to be utilized as a biochemical marker in the diagnosis of complicated appendicitis in the pediatric population. However, well designed prospective diagnostic efficiency studies are essential to consolidate the association between hyponatremia and complicated acute appendicitis.

The Role of Alvarado Score in Predicting Acute Appendicitis and Its Severity in Correlation to Histopathology: A Retrospective Study in a Qatar Population

Background/objective

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical emergencies that require a proper diagnosis to avoid a negative outcome in the case of missed or delayed diagnosis. Our study aims to assess the diagnostic power of the Alvarado score and the prediction of the severity of acute appendicitis in correlation to intraoperative findings and the final histopathology (HP) result.

Methods

This retrospective study was applied to 1,303 patients with clinically proven acute appendicitis (AA) and available HP results. We correlated Alvarado score to the gold standard HP and intraoperative findings. We selected the cutoff point of Alvarado at 5 and 7 as they were the most frequent cutoff value mentioned in the literature and based on the ROC curve in this study to assess sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).

Results

The mean age of the study cohort is 33.3 ± 9.5 years, with a male predominance (75.8%). The negative appendectomy (NA) rate was 4%. The operative complication rate was 1.2%, and we recorded one mortality case (0.1%). The diagnostic evidence of AA was in 95.9% of cases. Alvarado score ≥ 7 presented sensitivity and specificity of 66.4% and 69.8%, respectively, with PPV of 98.1% and NPV of 8.1%, with an accuracy of 66.5%. For Alvarado score ≥ 5, the sensitivity was 91.2%, specificity was 22.6%, PPV was 96.5%, NPV was 9.8%, and accuracy was 88.4%. In addition, we demonstrated statistical significance between Alvarado risk stratification with HP and intraoperative grades (p = 0.001 each).

Conclusion

The Alvarado scoring system alone is not enough to diagnose AA with unsatisfactory sensitivity and specificity. However, it is a good indicator of the severity of AA that we can depend on to prioritize those patients waiting for surgery.

The Diagnostic Differentiation Challenge in Acute Appendicitis: How to Distinguish between Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis in Adults

(1) Background: How to best define, diagnose and differentiate uncomplicated from complicated acute appendicitis remains debated. Hence, the aim of this review was to present an overview of the current knowledge and emerging field of acute appendicitis with a focus on the diagnostic differentiation of severity currently subject to ongoing investigations. (2) Methods: We conducted a PubMed search using the MeSH terms “appendicitis AND severity” and “appendicitis AND classification”, with a focus on studies calling appendicitis as ‘uncomplicated’ or ‘complicated’. An emphasis on the last 5 years was stressed, with further studies selected for their contribution to the theme. Further studies were retrieved from identified full-text articles and included per the authors’ discretion. (3) Results: The assumption that appendicitis invariably will proceed to perforation has been outdated. Both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis exist with likely different pathophysiology. Hence, this makes it important to differentiate disease severity. Clinicians must diagnose appendicitis, but, in the next step, also differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in order to allow for management decisions. Diagnostic accuracy without supportive imaging is around 75–80% and, based on clinical judgement and blood tests alone, the negative appendectomy rate has been described as high as 36%. More research is needed on available biomarkers, and the routine use of imaging still remains debated. Scoring systems have the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, but no scoring system has yet been validated for differentiating disease severity. Currently, no universally agreed definition exists on what constitutes a complicated appendicitis. (4) Conclusions: Uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis appear to have different pathophysiology and should be treated differently. The differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis remains a diagnostic challenge.

Mean Platelet Volume in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Mean Platelet Volume (MPV) has been suggested as a biomarker for acute appendicitis (AA) in the adult population. The utility of MPV in pediatric AA remains vague. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to systematically summarize and compare all relevant data on MPV as a diagnostic biomarker for AA in children. Methods: Databases were systematically searched using keywords ((mean platelet volume) OR mpv) AND (appendicitis). The inclusion criteria were all comparative studies of MPV in children aged less than 18 years and diagnosed with AA. Two authors independently assessed the methodological quality using the Downs and Black scale. Results: We included fourteen studies in the final meta-analysis; most were retrospective. Eight studies compared the MPV values between AA and non-AA; four studies compared the same between AA and healthy controls; two studies compared the MPV values among all three groups. The estimated heterogeneity among the studies for all outcomes was high and statistically significant. The pooling the data showed no statistically significant difference in MPV (weighted mean difference (WMD) = −0.42, 95% CI = (−1.04, 0.20), p = 0.19) between AA and healthy controls or AA and non-AA cases (WMD = 0.01, 95% CI = (−0.15, 0.17), p = 0.90). Conclusion: While MPV levels seem to have some utility in adult AA diagnosis, MPV levels should not dictate treatment options in pediatric AA.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy for Patients With Perforated Appendicitis

Introduction

Acute appendicitis can lead to perforation which can be lethal. The present study assessed the outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy in patients with perforated appendicitis.

Methodology

A comparative study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical & Health Sciences (LUMHS), between March 2, 2019 and July 7, 2020. The inclusion criteria consisted of a diagnosis of perforated appendicitis. Exclusion criteria consisted of intellectual disability hindering the procurement of informed consent, pediatric patients < 15 years of age, patients with an appendicular mass or abscess unsuited for laparoscopic appendectomy, severe sepsis or septic shock on presentation, and pregnant women. Patients were allocated to either open appendectomy (Group A) or laparoscopic appendectomy (Group B). The data gathering proforma recorded demographics, surgical findings, operating room (OR) time, length of inpatient care, requirement of analgesic, and any adverse events following surgery. All of the surgeries were conducted by an experienced surgical consultant with an experience of at least five years.

Results

A total of 85 patients were included in the laparoscopic appendectomy group, while 101 cases were included in the open appendectomy group. The use of analgesics thrice a day to manage the postoperative pain was significantly associated with the open appendectomy (p < 0.0001). Moreover, the postoperative length of hospitalization was substantially greater in patients who underwent open appendectomy than those who underwent laparoscopic procedure (p < 0.0001). Wound-related complications were considerably lower in patients who had laparoscopic appendectomy as compared to those who had open appendectomy (23.53% versus 40.5%; p = 0.013). 

Conclusion

The length of stay was significantly lower in patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Moreover, laparoscopic appendectomy was also associated with a lower rate of wound infection postoperatively, thus giving the former an edge over the latter. Despite the finding that the postoperative pain was not considerably different between the two groups, patients who underwent open appendectomy group required significantly more painkillers to manage the postoperative pain. 

DIAgnostic iMaging or Observation in early equivocal appeNDicitis (DIAMOND): open-label, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Mild appendicitis may resolve spontaneously. The use of CT may lead to an overdiagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis. The aims of this study were to examine whether early imaging results in more patients being diagnosed with acute appendicitis than initial observation, and to study the safety and feasibility of score-based observation compared with imaging in patients with equivocal signs of appendicitis.

METHODS

Patients with suspected appendicitis with symptoms for fewer than 24 h and an Adult Appendicitis Score of 11-15 were eligible for this trial. After exclusions, patients were randomized openly into two equal-sized groups: imaging and observation. Patients in the imaging group had ultrasound imaging followed by CT when necessary, whereas those in the observation group were reassessed after 6-8 h with repeated scoring and managed accordingly. The primary outcome was the number of patients requiring treatment for acute appendicitis within 30 days.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were randomized to imaging and 92 to observation; after exclusions, 93 and 88 patients respectively were analysed. In the imaging group, more patients underwent treatment for acute appendicitis than in the observation group: 72 versus 57 per cent (difference 15 (95 per cent c.i. 1 to 29) per cent). This suggests that patients with spontaneously resolving appendicitis were not diagnosed or treated in the observation group. Some 55 per cent of patients in the observation group did not need diagnostic imaging within 30 days after randomization. There was no difference in the number of patients diagnosed with complicated appendicitis (4 versus 2 per cent) or negative appendicectomies (1 versus 1 per cent) in the imaging and observation groups.

CONCLUSION

Score-based observation of patients with early equivocal appendicitis results in fewer patients requiring treatment for appendicitis. Registration number: NCT02742402 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Predicting complicated appendicitis based on clinical findings: the role of Alvarado and Appendicitis Inflammatory Response scores

PURPOSE

The pre-interventional differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis is decisive for treatment. In the context of conservative therapy, the definitive diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis is mandatory. This study investigates the ability of clinical scoring systems and imaging to differentiate between the two entities.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of two cohorts from two tertiary referral centers in Switzerland and Germany. All consecutive patients underwent appendectomy between January 2008 and April 2013 (in the first cohort) or between January 2017 and June 2019 (the second cohort). Exclusion criteria did not apply as all patients found by the database search and received an appendectomy were included. Diagnostic testing and calculation of a receiver operating curve were performed to identify a cutoff for clinical scores that resulted in a minimum sensitivity of 90% to detect complicated appendicitis. The cutoff was combined with additional diagnostic imaging criteria to see if diagnostic properties could be improved.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifty-six patients were included in the analysis. Two hundred twenty patients (23%) had complicated appendicitis, and 736 patients (77%) had uncomplicated appendicitis or no inflammation. The complicated appendicitis cohort had a mean Alvarado score of 7.03 and a mean AIR of 5.21. This compared to a mean Alvarado of 6.53 and a mean AIR of 4.07 for the uncomplicated appendicitis cohort. The highest Alvarado score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 5 (sensitivity = 95%, specificity 8.99%). The highest AIR score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 3 (sensitivity 91.82%, specificity 18.53). The analysis showed that additional CT information did not improve the sensitivity of the proposed cut-offs.

CONCLUSION

AIR and Alvarado scores showed limited capability to distinguish between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis even with additional imaging in this retrospective cohort. As conservative management of appendicitis needs to exclude patients with complicated disease reliably, appendectomy seems until now to remain the safest option to prevent undertreatment of this mostly benign disease.

Demographic and Clinical Characteristics Associated With the Failure of Nonoperative Management of Uncomplicated Appendicitis in Children: Secondary Analysis of a Nonrandomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The factors associated with the failure of nonoperative management of appendicitis and the differences in patient-reported outcomes between successful and unsuccessful nonoperative management remain unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate factors associated with the failure of nonoperative management of appendicitis and compare patient-reported outcomes between patients whose treatment succeeded and those whose treatment failed.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This study was a planned subgroup secondary analysis conducted in 10 children's hospitals that included 370 children aged 7 to 17 years with uncomplicated appendicitis enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial between May 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, with 1-year follow-up comparing nonoperative management with antibiotics vs surgery for uncomplicated appendicitis. Statistical analysis was performed from November 1, 2019, to February 12, 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Nonoperative management with antibiotics vs surgery.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Failure of nonoperative management and patient-reported outcomes. The relative risk (RR) of failure based on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics was calculated. Patient-reported outcomes were compared based on the success or failure of nonoperative management.

RESULTS

Of 370 patients (34.6% of 1068 total patients; 229 boys [61.9%]; median age, 12.3 years [IQR, 10.0-14.6 years]) enrolled in the nonoperative group, treatment failure occurred for 125 patients (33.8%) at 1 year, with 53 patients (14.3%) undergoing appendectomy during initial hospitalization and 72 patients (19.5%) experiencing delayed treatment failure after hospital discharge. Higher patient-reported pain at presentation was associated with increased risk of in-hospital treatment failure (RR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.0-4.4]) but not delayed treatment failure (RR, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.7-2.3]) or overall treatment failure at 1 year (RR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.2]). Pain duration greater than 24 hours was associated with decreased risk of delayed treatment failure (RR, 0.3 [95% CI, 0.1-1.0]) but not in-hospital treatment failure (RR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.5-2.7]) or treatment failure at 1 year (RR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.4-1.2]). There was no increased risk of treatment failure associated with age, white blood cell count, sex, race, ethnicity, primary language, insurance status, transfer status, symptoms at presentation, or imaging results. Health care satisfaction at 30 days and patient-reported, health-related quality of life at 30 days and 1 year were not different. Satisfaction with the decision was higher with successful nonoperative management at 30 days (28.0 vs 27.0; difference, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.01-2.0]) and 1 year (28.1 vs 27.0; difference, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.2-2.0]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This analysis suggests that a higher pain level at presentation was associated with a higher risk of initial failure of nonoperative management and that a longer duration of pain was associated with lower risk of delayed treatment failure. Although satisfaction was high in both groups, satisfaction with the treatment decision was higher among patients with successful nonoperative management at 1 year.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02271932.

In-hospital Delay of Appendectomy in Acute, Complicated Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Present theory is that uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis are different entities. Recent studies suggest it is safe to delay surgery in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. We hypothesize that patients with complicated appendicitis are at higher risk for postoperative complications when surgery is delayed.

METHODS

Data was used from the multicenter, prospective SNAPSHOT appendicitis study of 1975 patients undergoing surgery for suspected appendicitis. Adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis were included in this study. The primary outcome was the difference in postoperative complications between patients with complicated appendicitis who were operated within and after 8 h after hospital presentation. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in relationship to delay of appendectomy. Follow-up was 30 days. A multivariable analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 1341 adult patients with appendicitis, 34.3% had complicated appendicitis. In patients with complicated appendicitis, 22.8% developed a postoperative complication compared to 8.2% for uncomplicated appendicitis (P < 0.001). Delay in surgery (> 8 h) increased the complication rate in patients with complicated appendicitis (28.1%) compared to surgery within 8 h (18.3%; P = 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed a delay in surgery as an independent predictor for a postoperative complication in patients with complicated appendicitis (OR 1.71; 95%CI 1.01-2.68, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital delay of surgery (> 8 h) in patients with complicated appendicitis is associated with a higher risk of a postoperative complication. It is important that we recognize and treat these patients early.

Complicated Severe Appendicitis in a 58-Year-Old Female After COVID-19 Infection: A Coincidence or an Association?

Acute appendicitis (AA) remains the most common cause of acute abdomen worldwide. Although overall mortality in developed countries is low, complication due to perforation, abscess formation, stump appendicitis and intra-abdominal sepsis is associated with increased morbidity. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, an increasing proportion of complicated appendicitis has been reported. In this case, we present a 58-year-old female with a remote history of COVID-19 infection and severe appendicitis, complicated by sepsis. Viral infection has previously been proposed as a cause of appendicitis. Our report aims to describe our patient's course and comment on a potential association with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, as well as future diagnostic and management considerations.

Optimising diagnostics to discriminate complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis: a prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Growing evidence is showing that complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis are two different entities that may be treated differently. A correct diagnosis of the type of appendicitis is therefore essential. The Scoring system of Appendicitis Severity (SAS) combines clinical, laboratory and imaging findings. The SAS rules out complicated appendicitis in 95% (negative predictive value, NPV) and detects 95% (sensitivity) of patients with complicated appendicitis in adults suspected of acute appendicitis. However, this scoring system has not yet been validated externally. In this study, we aim to provide a prospective external validation of the SAS in a new cohort of patients with clinical suspicion of appendicitis. We will optimise the score when necessary.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The SAS will be validated in 795 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis confirmed by imaging. Data will be collected prospectively in multiple centres. The predicted diagnosis based on the SAS score will be compared with the combined surgical and histological diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for ruling out complicated appendicitis will be calculated. If the SAS does not reach a sensitivity and NPV of 95% in its present form, the score will be optimised. After optimisation, a second external validation will be performed in a new group of 328 patients. Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical perspective of the treating physician for differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and the patient's preferences for different treatment options will be assessed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was granted by the Amsterdam UMC Medical Ethics Committee (reference W19_416 # 19.483). Because of the observational nature of this study, the study does not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. Results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals. This protocol is submitted for publication before analysis of the results.

Incidence of Complicated Appendicitis as a Metric of Health Care Delivery

BACKGROUND

Complicated acute appendicitis (CAA) has been linked to extremes of age, racial and socioeconomic disparities, public insurance, and remote residency. CAA rate has been used from 2005 to 2018 as a health care quality metric, with the assumption that delay in treatment was a main cause of perforation. We studied factors that could contribute to CAA focusing on modifiable factors which could be altered as part of a health care delivery system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All primary admissions for acute appendicitis (AA) from the 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample were linked to 2010 state-level physician density data. CAA was distinguished by codes for perforation, generalized peritonitis, or intra-abdominal abscess. A multivariable logistic regression model for CAA prediction was built.

RESULTS

A total of 288 556 patients were admitted with AA and 86 272 (29.9%) had CAA. Independent factors, linked to CAA, included age outside the 10-39 range (odds ratio (OR) = 2.1-2.4 and all P < .001), male gender (OR = 1.2), malnutrition (OR = 6.2), diabetes mellitus (OR = 2.1), chronic anemias (OR = 1.9), nonprivate insurances (OR 1.2-1.5), nonmetropolitan patient's residence (OR = 1.15), and Midwest region (OR = 1.2). Patient income and physician coverage were not significant factors after adjustment for all other covariates. Highest CAA fraction of 39.6% was noted in rural patients admitted to urban teaching facilities.

DISCUSSION

Although provider coverage at the state level may seem adequate and not related to increased CAA rates, the distance patients traveled for their definitive surgical care correlated with higher rates of CAA. Adjusting physician distribution into nonurban settings closer to patients could decrease rates of CAA by diminishing time to definitive care.

Incidence of appendicitis during COVID-19 lockdown: A nationwide population-based study

AIM

To investigate how a nationwide lockdown influences the incidence of appendicitis.

BACKGROUND

Communitive infectious diseases may play a role in the pathogenesis of appendicitis as indicated by a seasonal variation in the incidence rate. The spread of communitive infectious diseases has decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown; thus, we have an opportunity to study the incidence rate of appendicitis in an environment with less impact from common community infections.

METHODS

The study is a nationwide register-based cohort study of the entire Danish population of 5.8 million. The difference in the incidence of appendicitis in a population subjugated to a controlled lockdown with social distancing (study group) was compared to a population not subjugated to a controlled lockdown and social distancing (reference group).

RESULTS

The relative risk of appendicitis during the lockdown was 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82-1.03, p = 0.131). The relative risk of complicated appendicitis during the lockdown was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.49-0.93, p = 0.02). The incidence of uncomplicated appendicitis was not significantly different during the national lockdown.

CONCLUSIONS

During the national lockdown of Denmark due to the COVID-19 pandemic the incidence of complicated appendicitis was reduced significantly compared to previous years, indicating that infectious disease might be a factor in the pathogenesis of appendicitis with complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04407117).

The predictive value of ischemia-modified albumin in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A prospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

Surgical planning is critical for ongoing treatment and prognosis of the disease's course after an appendicitis diag-nosis. Ischemia-modified albumin (IMA) has been used as a biomarker for a variety of ischemia-related disorders in the past. The aim of this study is to determine the IMA level in patients with AA and to evaluate its predictive significance.

METHODS

A total of 139 participants were enrolled in the trial. After diagnosis and before surgery, the amount of plasma IMA was tested. Patients diagnosed with appendicitis in Group 1 (n=97) and volunteer surgical patients not diagnosed with appendicitis in Group 2 (n=42) were compared as the final diagnostic criterion.

RESULTS

The data of 139 patients with a mean age of 36.15 were evaluated statistically. IMA values were analyzed in both groups. The mean IMA of all patients was 0.74±0.16 AbsU. When the two groups were compared, it was seen that IMA was statistically higher in Group 1 than in the control group. While the area under the curve for IMA was 0.670, the sensitivity for the cutoff value of 0.715 was 68%, the specificity was 62%.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that IMA values provide significant results in predicting acute appendicitis.

The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio may distinguish complicated from non-complicated pediatric appendicitis: A retrospective study and literature review

BACKGROUND

To date, no parameter with satisfactory accuracy exists for the diagnosis of appendicitis. This retrospective study describes the discriminatory value of preoperative hematologic factors associated with complicated and non-complicated pediatric appendicitis.

METHODS

Clinical and laboratory data were obtained from 294 children diagnosed with appendicitis on admission and treated at our tertiary-level pediatric hospital from 2015 to 2017; they were divided into three groups: control group (n = 118), histologically proven complicated (n = 120), and non-complicated (n = 56) appendicitis.

RESULTS

Complicated appendicitis was associated with male preponderance and elevated neutrophil and monocyte levels (all p < 0.001). Non-complicated appendicitis was associated with elevated eosinophil levels (p = 0.023), and unaltered lymphocyte levels (p = 0.30). Compared to non-complicated disease, the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) was decreased in complicated appendicitis (p = 0.003) but unaltered in the control group (p = 0.38). In the discrimination analysis, LMR had high accuracy (AUC 0.73 ± 0.05; p < 0.001; odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) 6.0 (2.4-15.3)) and was the only parameter independently associated with complicated appendicitis on regression analysis (OR (95% CI), 0.544 (0.359-0.825); p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

We identified LMR as a novel potential marker for the differentiation of complicated from non-complicated pediatric appendicitis. This has implications on the treatment approach, either surgical in complicated disease or conservative in non-complicated disease.

Patient backgrounds and short-term outcomes of complicated appendicitis differ from those of uncomplicated appendicitis

Background

Appendicitis is classified as either complicated (CA) or uncomplicated (UA). Some authors have shown that the epidemiologic trends of CA and UA may differ. The aim of this study was to clarify differences in backgrounds and surgical outcomes between CA and UA patients.

Methods

This study was a cohort study. We extracted case data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database from January 2014 to December 2017. Patients were classified into three groups, depending on whether they underwent emergency appendectomy for CA (CA group), emergency appendectomy for UA (UA group), or elective appendectomy (EA group). We evaluated patient characteristics and surgical outcomes for each group.

Results

We included 89,355 adult patients in the study, comprising 29,331 CA, 48,691 UA, and 11,333 EA patients. Old age, larger body mass index, smoking, and medication with antidiabetic drugs, oral corticosteroids, oral antiplatelet drugs, and oral anticoagulant drugs were independent risk factors for CA. The percentage of CA increased with age. In-hospital mortality (0.15%, 0.02%, and 0.00%) and 30-d mortality (0.09%, 0.01%, and 0.00%), respectively, of CA patients were significantly higher than those of the UA and EA groups. The duration of postoperative antibiotic administration, duration of fasting, and time before removal of a prophylactic drain were significantly longer in the CA group than in the UA and EA groups.

Conclusion

Backgrounds and treatment outcomes of CA and UA patients after emergency surgery are entirely different. Thus, the treatment strategy of CA and UA patients should differ accordingly.

Comparative Accuracy of ICD-9 vs ICD-10 Codes for Acute Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

ICD codes are used to identify patients with appendicitis and to classify disease severity for reimbursement and research purposes. We sought to compare the accuracy of ICD-9 vs ICD-10 codes in classifying appendicitis as uncomplicated vs complicated (defined as perforated, necrotic, or abscess) compared with the clinical gold standard: surgeon characterization of the appendix in the operative report.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of operative reports and discharge ICD-9/10 codes for patients 18 years or older who underwent noninterval, nonincidental appendectomy from January 2012 to December 2019 at a tertiary referral center. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were calculated for ICD-9/10 codes to classify appendicitis as complicated when compared with surgeon description. Chi-square testing was used to compare agreement between ICD-9/10 codes and surgeon description.

RESULTS

A total of 1,585 patients underwent appendectomy. ICD-9 codes had higher sensitivity than ICD-10 codes for complicated appendicitis (sensitivity 0.84 and 0.54, respectively) and a similar positive predictive value (0.77 and 0.76, respectively). Overall, 91% of ICD-9 codes agreed with surgical description of disease, but 84.4% of ICD-10 codes agreed with surgical description (p < 0.01). Among cases classified as complicated by the surgeon, 84% (79/94) had an accurate ICD-9 code for complicated disease, but only 53.8% (57/106) of cases had an accurate ICD-10 code (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ICD-9 codes, ICD-10 codes were less accurate in characterizing severity of appendicitis. The ICD-10 coding schema does not provide an accurate representation of disease severity. Until this system is improved, significant caution is needed for people who rely on these data for billing, quality improvement, and research purposes.

Social Vulnerability and Appendicitis: Single-Institution Study in a High Insurance State

INTRODUCTION

Multiple factors signifying higher social vulnerability, including lower socioeconomic status and minority race, have been associated with presentation with complicated appendicitis (CA). In this study, we compared the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of our population by appendicitis severity (uncomplicated appendicitis [UA] versus CA). We hypothesized that SVI would be similar between patients with UA and CA presenting to our institution, a safety-net hospital in a state with high healthcare insurance coverage.

METHODS

We included all patients at our hospital aged 18 y and older who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between 2012 and 2016. SVI values were determined based on the 2010 census data using ArcMap software. We used nonparametric univariate statistics to compare the SVI of patients with CA versus UA and multivariable regression to model the likelihood of operative CA.

RESULTS

A total of 997 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 177 had CA. The median composite SVI score for patients with CA was lower than for patients with UA (80% versus 83%, P = 0.004). UA was associated with higher socioeconomic (83% versus 80%, P = 0.007), household/disability (68% versus 55%, P = 0.037), and minority/language SVI scores (91% versus 89%, P = 0.037). On multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, insurance status, relevant comorbidities, and chronicity of symptoms, there was an inverse association between SVI and the likelihood of CA (odds ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.4-0.87, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of high healthcare insurance and a medical center experienced in caring for vulnerable populations, patients presenting with UA have a higher composite SVI, and thus greater social vulnerability, than patients presenting with CA.

The role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as an outcome predictor factor in acute appendicitis: a single medical center’s experience

Introduction: Acute abdominal pain persists in defying modern diagnostic procedures. Inflammatory response variables in urine and blood tests can help rule out other disorders and support a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA), but there is no specific blood test that can diagnose AA. In order to address this, our study sought to establish the value of (NLR) as a prognostic and severity predictor in patients with AA.

Material and method: We conducted an observational retrospective study of 356 patients who had undergone surgery for AA, assessing NLR as an outcome metric. The NLR was estimated using the differential WBC (white blood count) reported on admission; the data obtained were then recorded in a database and statistically analyzed.

Results: The NLR medians correlated (p<0.001) in uncomplicated AA, AA with localized peritonitis, and AA with generalized peritonitis (Kruskal-Wallis test). The ROC curve identified 81.4 % sensitivity, 62.5 % specificity, and a 73 % AUC in localized peritonitis. The NLR value was associated with generalized peritonitis with a sensitivity of 63.7 %, specificity of 64.3 %, and AUC of 68.2%. The NLR-patient death association had 100% sensitivity, 80.3% specificity, and 93.5 AUC.

Conclusion: NLR determination in individuals with acute appendicitis may be useful in predicting complications. NLR values greater than 7.86 are usually related with generalized peritonitis, while values larger than 12.9 may predict an increased risk of patient death. Calculating NLR from a complete blood count is a straightforward and cost-effective method of analyzing complicated AA in resource-constrained settings.

Primary Closure or Delayed Primary Closure? Assessment of Optimum Management of Surgical Wounds for Perforated Appendicitis

BACKGROUND: Open appendectomy is the treatment of choice for perforated appendicitis. Perforated appendicitis is associated with a 15–20% risk of developing post-operative wound infection, which the later associated with increased morbidity as increasing post-operative pain, longer hospital stay, suppurative wounds, patient dissatisfaction and increase cost of treatment. Some literatures revealed inconsistent results related to the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) between delayed primary closures (DPC) and primary closure (PC) in open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. AIM: The objective of the study is to define the best practice of wound management in patients operated on for perforated appendicitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients having perforated appendicitis underwent open appendectomy enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly grouped according to the method of managing the surgical incisions into two groups; patients with their incisions closed primarily (PC) and those with their incisions left open to be frequently dressed for 5 days with Betadine-soaked gauze packing till it become clean then closed (DPC). An infected wound was assigned as such if purulent discharge yielded from the incision site. Results to be addressed were the incidence of SSI and the hospitalization length. RESULTS: Out of the total 120 patients, 19.17 % developed SSI following closure of the incision. Patients managed by PC revealed higher rate of SSI than DPC group (32.8% vs. 5.1%, p < 0.001) and longer hospitalization (8.3 vs. 6.4 days, with a p < 5%). CONCLUSION: DPC is preferred policy over PC when managing an open appendicectomy wounds for perforated appendicitis, as the former is associated with low incidence of wound infection and shorter hospitalization.

Two-Year Experiences of 500 Appendectomies in Lahore General Hospital, Lahore

Introduction

Acute appendicitis is a leading cause of abdominal conditions in emergency departments. Evidence from research studies has indicated the efficacies of surgical procedures involving appendectomies. However, in Pakistan, there is a paucity of information regarding the epidemiology, clinical presentations, and surgical management of acute appendicitis.

Objective

This paper aims to report the epidemiologic data and findings of surgical management of acute appendicitis in Lahore General Hospital (LGH). The data was based on our two-year experiences of appendectomies in the hospital.

Materials and methodology

Data were collected retrospectively. The patients underwent appendectomies performed by the team of surgeons of Surgical Unit 1 of LGH in the Accident and Emergency (A&E) Department from July 2019 to October 2021.

Results

The total number of patients was 506, and the mean age was 26.8. Males (67.29%) and young adults aged 18-34 years were at higher risk of appendicitis. Compared to other surgical procedures performed, open appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy operative times were significantly shorter. Histopathology of all the cases showed acute inflammation of the appendix.

Discussion

Similar to findings from other research studies, the operative time of open appendectomies was shorter (70.6 minutes) in the hospital than the operative time of laparoscopic appendectomies (77 minutes). However, the overall operative times were longer than the operative times reported in some other research studies. Also, contrary to other research findings, open appendectomy (1.22 days) was associated with a longer length of hospital stay than laparoscopic appendectomy (≈1 day). Simple acute appendicitis was the most predominant operation findings (289, 57.1%).

Conclusion

Compared to other hospitals, the shorter hospital stays/recovery time indicated the high surgical skill of performing open and laparoscopic appendectomies in Lahore General Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan.

The association between appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal neoplasm histology-a population-based study

PURPOSE

Recent studies have reported alarming appendiceal tumor rates associated with complicated acute appendicitis, especially in patients presenting with a periappendicular abscess. However, the data on histology of appendiceal tumors among acute appendicitis patients is limited, especially in patient cohorts differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. We have previously reported the association of increased appendiceal tumor prevalence with complicated acute appendicitis in this population-based study. The objective of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the association of both appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal tumor histology.

METHODS

This nationwide population-based registry study (The Finnish Cancer Registry) was conducted from 2007 to 2013. All appendiceal tumors (n = 840) and available medical reports (n = 504) of these patients at eight study hospitals were previously evaluated, identifying altogether 250 patients with both acute appendicitis and appendiceal tumor.

RESULTS

The severity of acute appendicitis was significantly associated with more malignant tumor histology. The risk of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly higher among patients with periappendicular abscess (OR 15.05, CI 95% 6.98-32.49, p < 0.001) and patients presenting with perforated acute appendicitis (OR 4.09, CI 95% 1.69-9.90, p = 0.0018) compared to patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Similarly, patient age over 40 years was significantly associated with the risk of adenocarcinoma and pseudomyxoma (OR 26.46, Cl 95% 7.95-88.09, p < 0.001). Patient sex was not associated with a more malignant appendiceal tumor histology (p = 0.67).

CONCLUSION

More malignant appendiceal tumor histology of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly associated with patient age over 40 years and complicated acute appendicitis, especially periappendicular abscess.

A New Score for the Diagnosis of Complicated Appendicitis in Children - Complicated Appendicitis Pediatric Score

Aim

This study aims to construct and validate a new score for diagnosis of complicated appendicitis in children, complicated appendicitis pediatric score (CoAPS), to guide residents' clinical decision-making on choosing the correct patients for immediate surgery, reducing the emergency negative surgeries.

Methods

This prospective observational study enrolled two cohorts of patients 5-15 years old. Four hundred and seven consecutive patients were enrolled for the derivation cohort. Demographic data, clinical features, and histopathology data were collected. The outcome measure was the histological diagnosis of gangrenous appendicitis with or without perforation. The score was next validated in a separate cohort of 312 consecutive patients who were classified according to their risk of complicated appendicitis. The diagnostic performance of the score and the potential for the risk stratification to select patients for diagnostic imaging, emergency operative management, and reduce emergency negative operation rates were quantified.

Results

A positive "jumping up" test, vomiting, white blood cell >13.5 × 10^3/ml, lymphocytes <18%, and C-reactive protein >50 mg/dl were independent predictors for complicated appendicitis. The final prediction model exhibited an area under the curve of 0.890 (95% confidence interval: 0.859-0.922). The low-risk group demonstrated high sensitivity (90.4%) for complicated appendicitis, while scores 6 or more were very specific (95%) for the disorder. Describing the potential utility of the score, emergency ultrasound imaging would have been postponed in 14.5% of patients (P = 0.0016), and emergency negative explorations would have been cut by 87%.

Conclusion

The CoAPS score could guide residents in emergency management of children with complicated appendicitis reducing hospitalizations and urgent surgeries.

Accuracy of imaging in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in daily clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Radiologic imaging can accurately diagnose acute appendicitis, but little is known about its discriminatory capacity between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the accuracy of imaging in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHODS

Data was used from the prospective, nationwide, observational SNAPSHOT appendicitis database, including patients with suspected acute appendicitis who were planned for an appendectomy. Usage of ultrasound (US), CT, MRI or a combination was recorded. Radiological reports were used to group for complicated or uncomplicated appendicitis. The reference standard was based on operative and pathological findings. Primary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis. Secondary outcomes were diagnostic accuracy results per imaging modality and for the subgroups age, BMI, and sex.

RESULTS

Preoperative imaging was performed in 1964 patients. In 1434 patients (73%), only US was used; in 109 (6%) patients, only CT was used; and 421 (21%) patients underwent US followed by CT or MRI. Overall, imaging workup as practiced, following the national guideline, had a poor sensitivity for complicated appendicitis of only 35%, although specificity was as high as 93%. For US, accuracy for complicated appendicitis was higher in children than in adults; sensitivity 41.2% vs. 26.4% and specificity 94.6% vs. 93.4%, respectively, p = 0.003. For relevant subgroups such as age, sex and BMI, no other differences in the discriminatory performance were found.

CONCLUSION

A diagnostic workup with stepwise imaging, using a conditional CT or MRI strategy, poorly discriminates between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis in daily practice.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Appendicitis in Adults: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency in the world, with an annual incidence of 96.5 to 100 cases per 100 000 adults.

OBSERVATIONS

The clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis is based on history and physical, laboratory evaluation, and imaging. Classic symptoms of appendicitis include vague periumbilical pain, anorexia/nausea/intermittent vomiting, migration of pain to the right lower quadrant, and low-grade fever. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis is made in approximately 90% of patients presenting with these symptoms. Laparoscopic appendectomy remains the most common treatment. However, increasing evidence suggests that broad-spectrum antibiotics, such as piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy or combination therapy with either cephalosporins or fluroquinolones with metronidazole, successfully treats uncomplicated acute appendicitis in approximately 70% of patients. Specific imaging findings on computed tomography (CT), such as appendiceal dilatation (appendiceal diameter ≥7 mm), or presence of appendicoliths, defined as the conglomeration of feces in the appendiceal lumen, identify patients for whom an antibiotics-first management strategy is more likely to fail. CT findings of appendicolith, mass effect, and a dilated appendix greater than 13 mm are associated with higher risk of treatment failure (≈40%) of an antibiotics-first approach. Therefore, surgical management should be recommended in patients with CT findings of appendicolith, mass effect, or a dilated appendix who are fit for surgery, defined as having relatively low risk of adverse outcomes or postoperative mortality and morbidity. In patients without high-risk CT findings, either appendectomy or antibiotics can be considered as first-line therapy. In unfit patients without these high-risk CT findings, the antibiotics-first approach is recommended, and surgery may be considered if antibiotic treatment fails. In unfit patients with high-risk CT findings, perioperative risk assessment as well as patient preferences should be considered.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Acute appendicitis affects 96.5 to 100 people per 100 000 adults per year worldwide. Appendectomy remains first-line therapy for acute appendicitis, but treatment with antibiotics rather than surgery is appropriate in selected patients with uncomplicated appendicitis.

Risk of appendiceal neoplasm after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management is often the treatment of choice in cases of complicated appendicitis and routine interval appendectomy is not usually recommended. Actually, recent studies show an alarming number of appendiceal neoplasms following interval appendectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of appendiceal neoplasms and their histological types after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in adults.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Studies reporting appendiceal neoplasm rates after interval appendectomy and histopathological characteristics were included. The most recent World Health Organization (WHO) classification of malignant tumours was considered. A pooled prevalence analysis for both prevalence and pathology was performed.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies was included: seven retrospective series and one randomized controlled trial. The pooled prevalence of neoplasms after interval appendectomy was 11% (95% CI 7-15; I2 = 37.5%, p = 0.13). Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms occurred in 43% (95% CI 19-68), adenocarcinoma in 29% (95% CI 6-51), appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm in 21% (95% CI 6-36), globet cell carcinoma in 13% (95% CI -2-28), adenoma or serrated lesions in 20% (95% CI -0-41) of cases.

CONCLUSION

The risk of appendiceal neoplasm in patients treated with interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is 11%; mucinous neoplasm is the most common histopathological type. Further studies should investigate this association in order to clarify the biological pathway and clinical implications.

Appendicitis as a possible safety signal for the COVID-19 vaccines

This study reviewed cases of appendicitis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines reported to VigiBase, the WHO database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs). Three hundred fifty-eight cases were identified, and disproportionate reporting was noted, with 329 calculated expected cases. Upon review, 24 ICSRs were excluded, so 334 unique ICSRs underwent clinical review from 19 countries. Forty-eight percent of ICSRs reported imaging and 69% noted surgical intervention. The cases were clinically coherent, with an apparent increase in reporting in the four days post-vaccination and a possible dose-response relationship. Appendicitis has been suggested as an adverse event of special interest post-vaccination against COVID-19 after a numerical increase in the vaccine arm of a clinical trial. The case series may be affected by differences in global patterns of reporting, and it is not possible to prove nor disprove causality from this case series. Global longitudinal studies are required to clarify any possible relationship.

Immunohistochemical Inflammation in Histologically Normal Appendices in Patients with Right Iliac Fossa Pain

BACKGROUND

Histologically normal appendices resected for right iliac fossa pain in children demonstrate immunohistochemical markers of inflammation. We aimed to establish if subclinical inflammation was present in histologically normal appendices resected from adults with right iliac fossa pain.

METHODS

Immunohistochemistry was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded appendices for tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-2R and serotonin in four groups: Group I (n = 120): uncomplicated appendicitis, Group II (n = 118): complicated appendicitis (perforation or gangrene), Group III (n = 104): histologically normal appendices resected for right iliac fossa pain and Group IV (n = 106) appendices resected at elective colectomy. Expression was quantified using the H-scoring system.

RESULTS

Median, interquartile range expression of TNF-α was increased in Groups I (5.9, 3.1-9.8), II (6.8, 3.6-12.1) and III (9.8, 6.2-15.2) when compared with Group IV (3.0, 1.4-4.7, p < 0.01). Epithelial expression of IL-6 in Groups II (44.0, 8.0-97.0) and III (71.0, 18.5-130.0) was increased when compared with Group IV (9.5, 1.0-60.2, p < 0.01). Expression of mucosal IL-2R in Groups I (47.4, 34.8-69.0), II (37.8, 25.4-60.4) and III (18.4, 10.1-34.7) was increased when compared with Group IV (2.8, 1.2-5.7, p < 0.01). Serotonin content in Groups I (3.0, 0-30.0) and II (0, 0-8.5) was decreased when compared with Groups III (49.7, 16.7-107.5) and IV (43.5, 9.5-115.8, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Histologically normal appendices resected from symptomatic patients exhibited increased proinflammatory cytokine expression on immunohistochemistry suggesting the presence of an inflammatory process not detected on conventional microscopy.

Preoperative predictors of extended resection in patients with complicated acute appendicitis undergoing surgery

Background : Appendectomy can be challenging and occasionally converted to extensive resection for complicated appendicitis. However, optimal treatment strategies can be developed using preoperative risk assessment. Thus, we aimed to investigate the preoperative predictors of extensive resection in complicated appendicitis patients undergoing surgery. Materials and methods : In total, 173 complicated appendicitis patients undergoing surgery between 2014 and 2019 were classified into the appendectomy (n = 153) or extensive resection (n = 20) groups. Clinicopathological factors and surgical outcomes were compared between groups. Results : Extensive resection was performed in 20 of 173 complicated appendicitis patients (11.5%). The rates of having defects in the wall structure at the appendix root on computed tomography images were significantly higher, and the duration from onset to surgery was significantly longer in the extensive resection group. Significant differences were found in operative duration, blood loss and postoperative hospitalization, but none in the incidence of postoperative complications between groups. Multivariate analyses showed that defects in the wall structure at the appendix root and five days or longer from onset were identified as independent predictors of extensive resection. Conclusions : Defects in the wall structure at the appendix root and five days or longer from onset predict extensive resection performance in complicated appendicitis patients. J. Med. Invest. 68 : 334-341, August, 2021.

Current Practice of Acute Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management in China (PANDA-C): A National Cross-Sectional Survey

Background: The aim of this study was to describe and analyze the current status of the diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in China. Patients and Methods: An online record system was used to collect data retrospectively from 52 medical centers in mainland China. All patients with acute appendicitis who were first treated at the hospital in 2017 were included and followed up for one year. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to exclude the potential confounders and analyze the difference in outcomes between the non-operative management (NOM) and surgical groups. Results: A total of 10,187 patients were enrolled, of whom 5,517 (54.2%) were males. A total of 2,056 (20.2%) cases received NOM. The one-year recurrence rate of appendicitis in the NOM group was 19.3%. On PSM analysis, we found that the NOM group had a lower complication rate (2% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.001) and an acceptable success rate (96.8% vs. 100%; p < 0.001) compared with the operative group in patients with non-complicated acute appendicitis. However, in the complicated acute appendicitis population, the in-hospital complication rate in the NOM group was higher (10.8% vs. 5.8%; p = 0.048) and the success rate was lower (95.4% vs. 100%; p < 0.001) than the operative group. The recurrence rate was lower in patients with non-complicated acute appendicitis than in those with complicated acute appendicitis (17.3% vs. 30.8%; p = 0.010). In the operative group, pre-operative antimicrobial prophylaxis-covered anaerobes could reduce the surgical site infection (SSI) rate compared with that in the non-covered anaerobes group in non-complicated patients (0.9% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.020). Conclusions: Appendectomy is currently the most effective treatment for acute appendicitis. However, NOM is an alternative treatment for non-complicated acute appendicitis but not for complicated acute appendicitis because of the lower complication rate, considerable success rate, and recurrence rate.

Nationwide paediatric cohort study of a protective association between allergy and complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

In a nationwide cohort the potentially protective association between allergy and complicated appendicitis was analysed, and the influence of seasonal antigens, antihistamine treatment, and timing of allergy onset assessed.

METHODS

Some 1 112 571 children born between 2000 and 2010 were followed from birth until the end of 2014. A cross-sectional analysis of appendicitis cases, with comparison of allergic versus non-allergic children for absolute risk and odds of complicated appendicitis was first undertaken. This was followed by a longitudinal analysis of children with allergy and matched controls who had never had an allergy, for incidence rate and hazard of subsequent complicated or simple appendicitis.

RESULTS

Of all children, 20.4 per cent developed allergy and 0.6 per cent had appendicitis during follow-up. Among children with appendicitis, complicated appendicitis was more common among non-allergic children (18.9 per cent, 948 of 5016) than allergic children (12.8 per cent, 173 of 1351) (P < 0.001), and allergic children had a lower adjusted odds of complicated appendicitis (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95 per cent c.i. 0.67 to 0.96; P = 0.021). The risk of complicated appendicitis among children with manifest allergy was reduced by one-third in the longitudinal analysis (incidence rate 0.13 versus 0.20 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio (HR) 0.68, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to 0.81; P < 0.001), whereas the risk of simple appendicitis remained unchanged (incidence rate 0.91 versus 0.91; HR 1.00, 0.94 to 1.07; P = 0.932). Seasonal antigen exposure was a protective factor (adjusted OR 0.82, 0.71 to 0.94; P = 0.004) and ongoing antihistamine medication a risk factor (adjusted OR 2.28, 1.21 to 4.28; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Children with allergy have a lower risk of complicated appendicitis, but the same overall risk of simple appendicitis. Seasonal antigen exposure reduced, and antihistamine treatment increased, the risk of complicated disease.

WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs include early recognition, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and prompt physiologic stabilization using a critical care environment, combined with an optimal surgical approach. Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) have jointly completed an international multi-society document in order to facilitate clinical management of patients with IAIs worldwide building evidence-based clinical pathways for the most common IAIs. An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting information was shared by an international task force from 46 countries with different clinical backgrounds. The aim of the document is to promote global standards of care in IAIs providing guidance to clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of IAIs.

Acute Appendicitis in the Elderly: A Literature Review on an Increasingly Frequent Surgical Problem

With increased life expectancy and the growing total population of elderly patients, there has been rise in the number of cases of acute appendicitis in elderly people. Although acute appendicitis is not the most typical pathological condition in the elderly, it is not uncommon. Most of these patients require surgical treatment, and as with any acute surgical pathology in advanced age, treatment possibilities are affected by comorbidities, overall health status, and an increased risk of complications. In this literature review we discuss differences in acute appendicitis in the elderly population, with a focus on clinical signs, diagnostics, pathogenesis, treatment, and results.

Synchronous presentation of acute cholecystitis and acute appendicitis successful treatment in one step laparoscopic procedure. A case series and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Hundreds of thousands of cholecystectomies and appendectomies are performed in the United States annually. Due to the prevalence of cholecystitis and appendicitis, a subset of patients will require both operations. The limited literature describing these patients supports a laparoscopic approach over open surgery; consistent with the advantages of laparotomy over open surgery in the treatment of each condition individually.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report two cases where a patient presented with cholecystitis and appendicitis simultaneously. An abdominal computer tomography (CT) scan revealed the presence of the two diagnoses, which was then confirmed by an abdominal ultrasound. A four-access port was utilized for simultaneous appendectomy and cholecystectomy.

DISCUSSION

A review of the literature indicates that simultaneous infection with appendicitis and cholecystitis is rare, and thus clinical presentation, lab work, and imaging studies are all needed to support such a diagnosis. Potential findings on imaging in these patients may include distended gallbladder with thickened wall and fluid-filled dilated appendix with mural enhancement. In the event that both clinical presentation and further work-up indicate both pathologies, laparoscopic intervention is suitable. A four-access port is deemed the conservative approach to dealing with such cases.

CONCLUSION

Finding a single diagnosis responsible for a patient's illness is a high priority in an acute care setting, a concept known as diagnostic parsimony. However, it is inevitable that very common illnesses will be comorbid in a subset of patients, and physicians should be prepared to consider contemporaneous illness in the isolated circumstances it is warranted.

Impact of COVID-19 on presentation, management, and outcomes of acute care surgery for gallbladder disease and acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly disrupted both elective and acute medical care. Data from the early months suggest that acute care patient populations deferred presenting to the emergency department (ED), portending more severe disease at the time of presentation. Additionally, care for this patient population trended towards initial non-operative management.

AIM

To examine the presentation, management, and outcomes of patients who developed gallbladder disease or appendicitis during the pandemic.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with acute cholecystitis, symptomatic cholelithiasis, or appendicitis in two EDs affiliated with a single tertiary academic medical center in Northern California between March and June, 2020 and in the same months of 2019. Patients were selected through a research repository using international classification of diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes. Across both years, 313 patients were identified with either type of gallbladder disease, while 361 patients were identified with acute appendicitis. The primary outcome was overall incidence of disease. Secondary outcomes included presentation, management, complications, and 30-d re-presentation rates. Relationships between different variables were explored using Pearson’s r correlation coefficient. Variables were compared using the Welch’s t-Test, Chi-squared tests, and Fisher’s exact test as appropriate.

RESULTS

Patients with gallbladder disease and appendicitis both had more severe presentations in 2020. With respect to gallbladder disease, more patients in the COVID-19 cohort presented with acute cholecystitis compared to the control cohort [50% (80) vs 35% (53); P = 0.01]. Patients also presented with more severe cholecystitis in 2020 as indicated by higher mean Tokyo Criteria Scores [mean (SD) 1.39 (0.56) vs 1.16 (0.44); P = 0.02]. With respect to appendicitis, more patients were diagnosed with a perforated appendix at presentation in 2020 [20% (36) vs 16% (29); P = 0.02] and a greater percentage were classified as emergent cases using the emergency severity index [63% (112) vs 13% (23); P < 0.001]. While a greater percentage of patients were admitted to the hospital for gallbladder disease in 2020 [65% (104) vs 50% (76); P = 0.02], no significant differences were observed in hospital admissions for patients with appendicitis. No significant differences were observed in length of hospital stay or operative rate for either group. However, for patients with appendicitis, 30-d re-presentation rates were significantly higher in 2020 [13% (23) vs 4% (8); P = 0.01].

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients presented with more severe gallbladder disease and appendicitis. These findings suggest that the pandemic has affected patients with acute surgical conditions.

Abdominal drainage to prevent intra-peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015 and last updated in 2018. Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed primarily for acute appendicitis. Patients who undergo appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, are more likely to suffer postoperative complications. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of abdominal drainage to prevent intraperitoneal abscess after appendectomy (irrespective of open or laparoscopic) for complicated appendicitis; to compare the effects of different types of surgical drains; and to evaluate the optimal time for drain removal.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, the World Health Organization International Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and three trials registers on 24 February 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage versus no drainage in people undergoing emergency open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. We also included RCTs that compared different types of drains and different schedules for drain removal in people undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess evidence certainty. We included intraperitoneal abscess as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were wound infection, morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, hospital costs, pain, and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

Use of drain versus no drain We included six RCTs (521 participants) comparing abdominal drainage and no drainage in participants undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The studies were conducted in North America, Asia, and Africa. The majority of participants had perforated appendicitis with local or general peritonitis. All participants received antibiotic regimens after open appendectomy. None of the trials was assessed as at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effects of abdominal drainage versus no drainage on intraperitoneal abscess at 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 3.21; 5 RCTs; 453 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or wound infection at 30 days (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.56; 5 RCTs; 478 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were seven deaths in the drainage group (N = 183) compared to one in the no-drainage group (N = 180), equating to an increase in the risk of 30-day mortality from 0.6% to 2.7% (Peto odds ratio 4.88, 95% CI 1.18 to 20.09; 4 RCTs; 363 participants; low-certainty evidence). Abdominal drainage may increase 30-day overall complication rate (morbidity; RR 6.67, 95% CI 2.13 to 20.87; 1 RCT; 90 participants; low-certainty evidence) and hospital stay by 2.17 days (95% CI 1.76 to 2.58; 3 RCTs; 298 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to no drainage. The outcomes hospital costs, pain, and quality of life were not reported in any of the included studies. There were no RCTs comparing the use of drain versus no drain in participants undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Open drain versus closed drain There were no RCTs comparing open drain versus closed drain for complicated appendicitis. Early versus late drain removal There were no RCTs comparing early versus late drain removal for complicated appendicitis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The certainty of the currently available evidence is low to very low. The effect of abdominal drainage on the prevention of intraperitoneal abscess or wound infection after open appendectomy is uncertain for patients with complicated appendicitis. The increased rates for overall complication rate and hospital stay for the drainage group compared to the no-drainage group are based on low-certainty evidence. Consequently, there is no evidence for any clinical improvement with the use of abdominal drainage in patients undergoing open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The increased risk of mortality with drainage comes from eight deaths observed in just under 400 recruited participants. Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine the effects of drainage on morbidity and mortality outcomes.