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

The diagnostic values of procalcitonin and interleukin 6 in acute appendicitis

OBJECTIVE

Despite the recent use of computed tomography scan and diagnostic laparoscopy, acute appendicitis is still highly misdiagnosed. Timely diagnosis of acute appendicitis is more crucial in children and elderly patients because of vague symptoms and rapid progression to perforation in these age groups, which may result in high rates of morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study was to find the diagnostic values of procalcitonin and interleukin 6 (IL-6) for diagnosing acute appendicitis in our center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who were suspected of acute appendicitis and who were referred to the emergency department of a tertiary care urban hospital in 2016 were enrolled in the study. A 5 mL blood sample was obtained from each patient before appendectomy and was examined for procalcitonin and IL-6. Then, the resected specimen of the appendix was studied by a pathologist, and a definite diagnosis was made.

RESULTS

Eighty patients including 53 (66.3%) men who underwent appendectomy were enrolled in the study. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was histopathologically confirmed in 60 (75%) patients including 18, 20, and 22 patients with inflammatory, suppurative, and gangrenous/perforated appendicitis, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of procalcitonin versus IL-6 for diagnosing acute appendicitis were 65% and 80% vs. 76% and 55%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of concurrent procalcitonin and IL-6 for diagnosing acute appendicitis were 95% and 55%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that parallel measurement of procalcitonin and IL-6 decreases unnecessary negative appendectomies.

Risk Factors for Perforated Appendicitis in the Acute Care Surgery Era-Minimizing the Patient's Delayed Presentation Factor

BACKGROUND

Numerous factors contribute to advanced disease or increased complications in patients with acute appendicitis (AA). This study aimed to identify risk factors associated with AA perforation, including the effect of system time (ST) delay, after controlling for patient time (PT) delay. In this study, PT was controlled (to less than or equal to 24 h) to better understand the effect of ST delay on AA perforation.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent surgery for AA at a tertiary referral hospital from October 2009 through September 2013 were reviewed. Data collected included demographics, body mass index, presence of fecalith, PT (i.e., duration of time from symptom onset to arrival in emergency department), and ST (i.e., duration of time from arrival in emergency department to operating room). AA was classified as simple (acute, nonperforated) versus advanced (gangrenous, perforated).

RESULTS

Seven hundred forty-seven patients underwent surgery for AA. After excluding patients with PT > 24 h, 445 patients fit the study criteria, of which 358 patients with simple AA and 87 patients with advanced disease. Advanced appendicitis patients were older and had higher body mass index, longer PT, higher WBC, and higher incidence of fecaliths. Both groups had similar ST. Risk factors for advanced appendicitis after multiple regression analysis are age >50 y old, WBC >15,000, the presence of fecaliths, and PT delay >12 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Once PT delay was limited to ≤24 h, the ST delay of >12 h did not adversely affect the incidence of advanced AA. Age >50 y, WBC >15,000, PT delay >12 h, and the presence of fecaliths were identified as risk factors associated with advanced AA.

Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Costs Associated with Laparoscopic Appendectomy in a Middle-Income Country with Universal Health Coverage

BACKGROUND

Although many studies have compared outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA), some clinical and economic outcomes continue to be controversial, particularly in low-medium-income countries. We aimed at determining clinical and economic outcomes associated with LA versus OA in adult patients in Colombia.

METHODS

Retrospective, cohort study based on administrative healthcare records included all patients who underwent LA or OA in Colombia's contributory regime between July 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015. Outcomes were 30-day mortality rates, ICU admissions rates, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs provided until discharge. Propensity score matching techniques were used to balance the baseline characteristics of patients (age, sex, comorbidities based on the Charlson index, insurer, and geographic location) and to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of LA as compared to OA over outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 65,625 subjects were included, 92.9% underwent OA and 7.1% LA. For the entire population, 30-day mortality was 0.74 per 100 appendectomies (95% CI 0.67-0.81), the mean and median LOS were 3.83 days and 1 day, respectively, and the ICU admissions rate during the first 30 days was 7.92% (95% CI 7.71-8.12). The ATE shows an absolute difference in the mortality rate after 30 days of -0.35 per 100 appendectomies (p = 0.023), in favor of LA. No effects on ICU admissions or LOS were identified. LA was found to increase costs by 514.13 USD on average, with total costs of 772.78 USD for OA and 1286.91 USD for LA (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia's contributory regime, LA is associated with lower 30-day mortality rate and higher hospital costs as compared to OA. No differences are found in ICU admissions or LOS.

Clinical recovery in children with uncomplicated appendicitis undergoing non-operative treatment: secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Non-operative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis in children is gaining ground. Pending definitive evidence regarding its effectiveness, there is a call to evaluate clinical recovery after non-operative treatment. In this study, we analyzed data collected during initial admission of a multicenter prospective cohort in which children, 7-17 year, were treated non-operatively for uncomplicated appendicitis. During admission clinical parameters (pain and gastro-intestinal symptoms), inflammation parameters and sequential abdominal ultrasound were recorded. In total, 45 children were included, 42(93%) were discharged without the need for appendectomy; median [IQR] pain scores on admission were 5 [4-7], decreasing to 2 [0-3] after 1 day of treatment. Initially, 28/42 (67%) reported nausea and 19/42 (45%) vomiting; after 1 day, this was 3/42 (7%) and 1/42 (2%), respectively. White blood cell count declined from a median [IQR] of 12.9 [10.7-16.7] 10E9/L on admission to 7.0 [5.8-9.9] 10E9/L on day 1. Median [IQR] C-reactive protein levels increased from 27.5 [9-69] mg/L on admission to 48 [22-80] mg/L on day 1, declining to 21.5 [11-42] mg/L on day 2. Follow-up ultrasound showed no signs of complicated appendicitis in any of the patients.Conclusion: Clinical symptoms resolved in most children after 1 day of non-operative treatment. This suggests that non-operative treatment is a viable alternative to appendectomy regarding clinical recovery.Trail registration: NCT01356641 What is Known: • Non-operative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis in children is safe and its use around the world is gaining ground, however high quality evidence from adequately designed randomized trials is still lacking. • Concerns have been raised regarding the potentially prolonged clinical recovery associated with non-operative treatment. What is New: • Most clinical symptoms resolve after 1 day of non-operative treatment in the majority of children.

Meta-analysis of in-hospital delay before surgery as a risk factor for complications in patients with acute appendicitis

Background

The traditional fear that every case of acute appendicitis will eventually perforate has led to the generally accepted emergency appendicectomy with minimized delay. However, emergency and thereby sometimes night‐time surgery is associated with several drawbacks, whereas the consequences of surgery after limited delay are unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess in‐hospital delay before surgery as risk factor for complicated appendicitis and postoperative morbidity in patients with acute appendicitis.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched from 1990 to 2016 for studies including patients who underwent appendicectomy for acute appendicitis, reported in two or more predefined time intervals. The primary outcome measure was complicated appendicitis after surgery (perforated or gangrenous appendicitis); other outcomes were postoperative surgical‐site infection and morbidity. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using forest plots if possible. Unadjusted data were pooled using generalized linear mixed models.

Results

Forty‐five studies with 152 314 patients were included. Pooled adjusted ORs revealed no significantly higher risk for complicated appendicitis when appendicectomy was delayed for 7–12 or 13–24 h (OR 1·07, 95 per cent c.i. 0·98 to 1·17, and OR 1·09, 0·95 to 1·24, respectively). Meta‐analysis of unadjusted data supported these findings by yielding no increased risk for complicated appendicitis or postoperative complications with a delay of 24–48 h.

Conclusion

This meta‐analysis demonstrates that delaying appendicectomy for presumed uncomplicated appendicitis for up to 24 h after admission does not appear to be a risk factor for complicated appendicitis, postoperative surgical‐site infection or morbidity. Delaying appendicectomy for up to 24 h may be an acceptable alternative for patients with no preoperative signs of complicated appendicitis.

Delay is safe

Conservative treatment of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis has been considered by surgeons a progressive disease leading to perforation for more than 100 years. In the last decades the theories about this concept gained attention, especially in adults. However, appendectomy for acute appendicitis remains the most common urgent/emergent surgical procedure. At present, accumulating evidences are showing the changing in clinical practice towards the non-operative management of several cases of acute appendicitis either non-complicated or complicated. The present review aims to show the literature results regarding the non-operative management of acute appendicitis in non-complicated and in complicated cases.

Clinical Management of Appendicitis

Background

Ever since the first appendectomy has been performed, surgery has been the standard of care for acute appendicitis, with antibiotic therapy being reserved for special situations. Recent studies have shown the feasibility of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis.

Methods

This clinical therapeutic review is based both on author expertise and a selective literature survey in PubMed based on the term 'appendicitis', combined with the terms 'acute', 'complicated', 'conservative', 'non-operative', 'therapy', 'surgery', and 'strategy'. According to these search results as well as to the treatment guidelines from the American College of Surgeons, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, European Association of Endoscopic Surgery, and World Society of Emergency Surgery, we present an interdisciplinary treatment concept.

Results

Approximately 90% of patients treated with antibiotics are able to avoid surgery during the initial admission. The other 10% that fail to respond to antibiotics require a rescue appendectomy. Recurrence rates of non-operated patients within 1 year are as high as 20-30%.

Conclusion

In uncomplicated appendicitis without risk factors for failure of non-operative management, a shared decision based on the patient's preferences should be made. In cases with risk factors, appendectomy is still the treatment recommended. If the diagnosis is uncertain or clinical symptoms are rather mild, antibiotic therapy should be started. In complicated appendicitis, management depends on the clinical state, with either immediate surgery or primarily antibiotic therapy and combined with drainage of abscess, being followed by interval appendectomy in some cases.

A simple algorithm to improve quality while reducing resource utilization in evaluation of suspected appendicitis in children

BACKGROUND

With similar effectiveness of ultrasonography, our institution replaced CT imaging with ultrasound for diagnosing appendicitis in children. An unexpected consequence was the overutilization of ultrasound. Our objective was to establish measures that could help prevent this overuse.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 327 consecutive pediatric patients evaluated for appendicitis between October 2014 and September 2015 at our institution was performed. Data on clinical, radiographic, and histopathologic findings were reviewed. Diagnostic accuracy of US and white blood cell (WBC) values was determined. An algorithm was created.

RESULTS

327 (100%) patients received an ultrasound for suspected appendicitis. WBC of 10,000/μl was determined to be the primary discriminant for management and ultrasound utilization. If a WBC ≥10,000/μL had been utilized as criteria for imaging, 49.5% fewer patients would have received an ultrasound.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical exam, WBC count, and surgery consultation prior to ultrasonography can lessen then need for ultrasound utilization in children with suspected appendicitis.

Association of IgE-Mediated Allergy With Risk of Complicated Appendicitis in a Pediatric Population

IMPORTANCE

Childhood appendicitis is commonly complicated by gangrene and perforation, yet the causes of complicated appendicitis and how to avoid it remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether children with IgE-mediated allergy have a lower risk of complicated appendicitis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study included all consecutive patients younger than 15 years (hereinafter referred to as children) who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis at a tertiary pediatric surgery center in Sweden between January 1, 2007, through July 31, 2017. Children were stratified between those with and without IgE-mediated allergies.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

Risk of complicated appendicitis with gangrene or perforation, with occurrence of IgE-mediated allergy as an independent variable and adjusted for age, sex, primary health care contacts, seasonal antigenic exposure, allergy medications, appendicolith, and duration of symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 605 included children (63.0% boys; median age, 10 years; interquartile range, 7-12 years), 102 (16.9%) had IgE-mediated allergy and 503 (83.1%) had no allergy. Complicated appendicitis occurred in 20 children with IgE-mediated allergy (19.6%) compared with 236 with no allergy (46.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.59). No significant allergy effect modification by sex, seasonal antigenic exposure, or allergy medication was found. Children with IgE-mediated allergy had a shorter hospital stay (median, 2 days for both groups; interquartile range, 1-2 days vs 1-5 days; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, children with IgE-mediated allergy had a lower risk of complicated appendicitis. The findings suggest that immunologic disposition modifies the clinical pattern of appendiceal disease. This theory introduces novel opportunities for understanding of the pathogenesis and clinical decision making for one of childhood's most common surgical emergencies.

Role of Laparoscopic Appendectomy Radix Ligation Techniques on the Formation of Inner Abdomen Abscess

Objectives:

Our aim was to study whether laparoscopic appendectomy radix ligation techniques were eutrophic in the development of intra-abdominal abscess.

Methods:

Between September 2009 and April 2017, all emergency cases admitted to our surgery polyclinic were reviewed, and the results of the patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were collected. Appendectomy radix ligation techniques were reviewed from surgical notes on discharge reports. Postoperative controls were also reviewed, and any cases with abscess formation were reported.

Results:

A total of 350 patients were included in the study. Of these cases, 207 were males, and 143 were females. The mean age of the patients was 26.89±4.9 years. One hundred eighty-nine cases were found to have two endoloops placed on top of each other, whereas 161 cases had a 2 mm distance left in between the two endoloops and tied. None of the 189 cases who had endoloops placed on top of each other developed abscess formation. However, of the 161 cases who had endoloops with a 2 mm distance in between, 8 reported with abscess formation in the inner abdomen. Of these eight cases, seven had percutaneous abscess drainage by an interventional radiologist, whereas one was treated with relaparoscopy.

Conclusion:

In the present study, patients who had endoloops placed on top of each other developed no abscess formation, whereas in the literature’s gold standard procedure, those with a 2 mm distance left between two endoloops developed an inner abdominal abscess formation in 8 (4.9%) of the patients. We believe that this 2 mm dead space distance left between the two endoloops contributes to the formation of the abscess.

To Determine Validation of RIPASA Score in Diagnosis of Suspected Acute Appendicitis and Histopathological Correlation with Applicability to Indian Population: a Single Institute Study

Although acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies worldwide, timely accurate diagnosis is always difficult for a surgeon even after availability of recent diagnostic tools. Our study is to determine validation of RIPASA score in diagnosis of acute appendicitis and histopathological correlation. A prospective study of 200 patients presented to emergency or surgical opd with right iliac fossa pain and suspected to have acute appendicitis were included in our study. RIPASA score calculated but appendectomy done on the basis of clinical assessment and hospital protocol and histopathological correlation done with a score. A score of 7.5 is cut off threshold, results compared with previous studies. In our study of 200 patients, M:F ratio of 1.56:1. Sensitivity of the RIPASA score was 95.89℅ with specificity 75.92% and diagnostic accuracy of 90.5%, expected and observed rate of negative appendectomy were 8.5 and 12.35%, respectively. So there is net reduction in negative appendectomy rate by 3.85%. Data analysis done with Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 21.0. RIPASA score at a cutoff value of 7.5 is easier, cheap, and better diagnostic tool in equivocal case of right iliac fossa pain in Indian scenario of limited availability of recent diagnostic tool in remote areas and affordability of these tool in the available set up, simultaneously, it also helps to reduce negative appendectomy rates.

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

BACKGROUND

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 from postoperative complications. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial.This is an update of the review first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of abdominal drainage to prevent intra-peritoneal abscess after open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 30 June 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 30 June 2017), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 30 June 2017), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (30 June 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (30 June 2017) and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 30 June 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage and no drainage in people undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias independently. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to rate the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs (521 participants), comparing abdominal drainage and no drainage in patients undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The studies were conducted in North America, Asia and Africa. The majority of the participants had perforated appendicitis with local or general peritonitis. All participants received antibiotic regimens after open appendectomy. None of the trials was at low risk of bias.There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of abdominal drainage and no drainage on intra-peritoneal abscess at 14 days (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.47 to 3.21; 5 RCTs; 453 participants; very low-quality evidence) or for wound infection at 14 days (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.56; 5 RCTs; 478 participants; very low-quality evidence). The increased risk of 30-day overall complication rate (morbidity) in the drainage group was rated as very low-quality evidence (RR 6.67, 95% CI 2.13 to 20.87; 1 RCT; 90 participants). 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 (OR) 4.88, 95% CI 1.18 to 20.09; 4 RCTs; 363 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There is 'very low-quality' evidence that drainage increases hospital stay compared to the no drainage group by 2.17 days (95% CI 1.76 to 2.58; 3 RCTs; 298 participants).Other outlined outcomes, hospital costs, pain, and quality of life, were not reported in any of the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the current evidence is very low. The effect of abdominal drainage on the prevention of intra-peritoneal 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 no drainage group is also subject to great uncertainty. Thus, there is no evidence for any clinical improvement by using 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 people recruited to the studies. Larger studies are needed to determine the effects of drainage on morbidity and mortality outcomes more reliably.

Imaging in pediatric appendicitis is key to a low normal appendix percentage: a national audit on the outcome of appendectomy for appendicitis in children

PURPOSE

A laparoscopic approach for emergency appendectomy is increasingly used, in pediatric patients as well. The objective of this study is to audit the current state of diagnostic work-up, surgical techniques and its outcome in children with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A prospective consecutive observational cohort study was carried out in a 2-month study period. All patients under 18 years that were operated for suspected acute appendicitis were included. Primary outcome was the infectious complication rate after open and laparoscopic approach; secondary outcomes were preoperative use of imaging and post-operative predictive value of imaging, normal appendix rate and children with a postoperative ileus.

RESULTS

A total of 541 children were operated for suspected acute appendicitis in 62 Dutch hospitals. Preoperative imaging was used in 98.9% of children. The normal appendix rate was 3.1%. In 523 children an appendectomy was performed. Laparoscopy was used in 61% of the patients and conversion rate was 1.7%. Complicated appendicitis was diagnosed in 29.4% of children. Overall 30-day complication rate was 11.9% and similar after open and laparoscopic. No difference was found in superficial surgical site infections, nor in intra-abdominal abscesses between the open and laparoscopic approach. Complicated appendicitis is an independent risk factor for infectious complications.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach is most frequently used, except for young children. Superficial surgical site infections are more frequent after open surgery only in patients with complicated appendicitis. The normal appendix rate is low, most likely because of routine preoperative imaging.

Population-based cohort study on the epidemiology of acute appendicitis in children in Sweden in 1987-2013

Background

The long‐term incidence of acute appendicitis has been reported to be declining in Europe and North America. Recent reports, however, indicate stabilized or even increased rates. The aim of this study was to investigate the present epidemiology of acute appendicitis and appendicectomy in a population‐based cohort of Swedish children.

Methods

The Swedish National Patient Register was queried for all children with acute appendicitis and/or appendicectomy in 1987–2013. Population‐based incidence rates were calculated. Rates were age‐ and sex‐adjusted, and analysed for temporal and regional trends.

Results

Some 56 774 children with acute appendicitis were identified, of whom 53 478 (94·2 per cent) underwent appendicectomy. The incidence rate of acute appendicitis declined by 43·7 per cent over 26 years, from 177·7 to 100·1 per 100 000 person‐years between 1987 and 2013. The most significant reduction was for non‐perforated appendicitis, from 138·5 to 68·4 per 100 000 person‐years between 1987 and 2009. The incidence rate of perforated appendicitis decreased from 28·0 to 19·9 per 100 000 person‐years and negative appendicectomies reduced from 48·5 to 3·6 per 100 000 person‐years during the study interval.

Conclusion

The incidence rates of acute appendicitis and negative appendicectomy have reduced markedly in Swedish children over time, with significantly different trends amongst non‐perforated appendicitis and perforated appendicitis. The full explanation for the observed findings is unclear.

Early operative management of complicated appendicitis is associated with improved surgical outcomes in adults

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the ideal management of complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

The New York State Planning and Research Cooperative database was used to identify all patients admitted with complicated appendicitis and undergoing appendectomy within 1-year. Primary outcome was any complication. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), hospital charges, and laparoscopy use. Outcomes were compared in appendectomy before or after 48h from admission.

RESULTS

31,167 patients ≥18yo were identified for analysis, 28,015(89.9%) underwent early appendectomy. Early appendectomy patients were more likely to be White (69.8% vs. 64.2% p < 0.01), and commercially insured (53.1% vs. 45.4%, p < 0.01). Of the 3152 undergoing delayed surgery, 1610(51.1%) had surgery later during the index admission, 715(22.7%) were readmitted urgently and underwent appendectomy, and 827(26.2%) had elective appendectomy. Patients undergoing delayed surgery had more complications (OR 1.34 95%CI 1.23-1.45), readmissions (OR 1.55 95%CI 1.42-1.70), high hospital charges (OR 4.79 95%CI 4.35-5.27), and prolonged LOS (OR 6.12 95%CI 5.61-6.68).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-level study of complicated appendicitis we found more complications, longer LOS, and higher charges in patients undergoing delayed surgery.

Laparoscopy in management of appendicitis in high-, middle-, and low-income countries: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency worldwide. Differences between high- and low-income settings in the availability of laparoscopic appendectomy, alternative management choices, and outcomes are poorly described. The aim was to identify variation in surgical management and outcomes of appendicitis within low-, middle-, and high-Human Development Index (HDI) countries worldwide.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, international prospective cohort study. Consecutive sampling of patients undergoing emergency appendectomy over 6 months was conducted. Follow-up lasted 30 days.

RESULTS

4546 patients from 52 countries underwent appendectomy (2499 high-, 1540 middle-, and 507 low-HDI groups). Surgical site infection (SSI) rates were higher in low-HDI (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.33-4.99, p = 0.005) but not middle-HDI countries (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.76-2.52, p = 0.291), compared with high-HDI countries after adjustment. A laparoscopic approach was common in high-HDI countries (1693/2499, 67.7%), but infrequent in low-HDI (41/507, 8.1%) and middle-HDI (132/1540, 8.6%) groups. After accounting for case-mix, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42-0.71, p < 0.001) and SSIs (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.14-0.33, p < 0.001). In propensity-score matched groups within low-/middle-HDI countries, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.23 95% CI 0.11-0.44) and SSI (OR 0.21 95% CI 0.09-0.45).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach is associated with better outcomes and availability appears to differ by country HDI. Despite the profound clinical, operational, and financial barriers to its widespread introduction, laparoscopy could significantly improve outcomes for patients in low-resource environments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02179112.

Drain Failure in Intra-Abdominal Abscesses Associated with Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that percutaneous drainage and interval appendectomy is an effective treatment for appendicitis with associated abscess. Few studies to date have analyzed risk factors for failed drain management. We hypothesized that older patients with more co-morbidities would be at higher risk for failing conservative treatment.

METHODS

The 2010-2014 editions of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) were queried for patients with diagnoses of peri-appendiceal abscesses. Minors and elective admissions were excluded. We identified patients who underwent percutaneous drainage and defined drain failure as undergoing a surgical operation after drainage but during the same inpatient visit to assess for factors associated with failure of drainage alone as a treatment. After univariable analysis, binomial logistic regression was used to assess for independent risk factors. Frequencies were analyzed by χ² and continuous variables by Student's t-test.

RESULTS

A total of 2,209 patients with appendiceal abscesses received drains; 561 patients (25.4%) failed conservative management and underwent operative intervention. On univariable analysis, patients who failed conservative management were younger, more likely to be Hispanic, have more inpatient diagnoses, and to have undergone drainage earlier in the hospital course. Multivariable regression demonstrated that the number of diagnoses, female sex, and Hispanic race were predictive of failure of drainage alone. Older age, West and Midwest census regions, and later drain placement were predictive of successful treatment with drainage alone. Failure was associated with more charges and longer hospital stay but not with a higher mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

Approximately a quarter of patients will fail management of appendiceal abscess with percutaneous drain placement alone. Risk factors for failure are patient complexity, female sex, earlier drainage, and Hispanic race. Failure of drainage is associated with higher total charges and longer hospital stay; however, no change in the mortality rate was noted.

72 h Is the Time Critical Point to Operate in Acute Appendicitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Delay of operative management of acute appendicitis may adversely affect post-operative outcomes and increase the likelihood of post-operative complications occurring. We aim to correlate the duration of symptoms with intra-operative findings to create a timeline of the pathological change in appendicitis.

METHODS

Appendicectomies performed at a large teaching hospital between June 2015 and July 2016 were prospectively analysed. Time of onset of pain, operative findings, pre-operative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white cell count (WCC) were recorded. Intra-operative findings were categorised by the macroscopic appearance of the appendix, which was subdivided into erythematous, purulent, necrotic and perforated. These results were correlated with the symptom duration. Statistical analysis was completed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety patients had histologically confirmed appendicitis during the study period. Median time to operation from symptom onset was 49 h. Median time for the appearances of erythematous, purulent, necrotic and perforated appendicitis to develop was 36.5, 41, 55.5 and 86 h, respectively (p value < 0.0001). Median CRP of the non-perforated and perforated appendicitis groups was 22 and 161 mg/L, respectively (p value < 0.0001). Our data demonstrated that after 72 h of symptoms, the likelihood of a perforated appendicitis increased significantly (p value < 0.0001) when compared to 60-72 h.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant increase in the likelihood of a perforated appendicitis occurs after 72 h of symptoms, when compared to 60-72 h. We can therefore argue that it may be reasonable to prioritise patients approaching 72 h of symptoms for operative management.

Early Uncomplicated Appendicitis—Who Can We Treat Nonoperatively?

This study evaluated nonoperative treatment for mild appendicitis and reviewed selection criteria to be used in introducing this option into clinical practice. A retrospective review of 73 consecutive cases of appendicitis treated by a single surgeon from 2011 to 2013 was completed. Patients who were diagnosed with mild appendicitis meeting the criteria of an APPENDICITIS scoring algorithm proposed in this manuscript were considered for nonoperative management. An additional 17 patients with mild appendicitis were offered and successfully treated nonoperatively between 2014 and 2016 and reviewed. Of these original 73 patients, 37 had moderate to severe appendicitis and directly underwent appendectomy. The remaining patients were diagnosed with mild appendicitis and considered eligible for nonoperative management. Of these, 14 patients were offered nonoperative therapy. Thirteen responded successfully; one patient responded partially, but later opted for surgery. In 2014, this scoring system and preliminary results were shared with the other surgeons in our department. Nonoperative management was then selectively adopted by a few of the surgeons from 2014 to 2016 with another 17 patients (APPENDICITIS score of 0 or 1) being offered and successfully managed nonoperatively. Patients with mild or early appendicitis can be successfully managed nonoperatively. A proposed APPENDICITIS scoring system may provide a helpful mnemonic for successfully selecting patients for this option.

Which One is Better? Comparison of the Acute Inflammatory Response, Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis and Alvarado Scoring Systems

Purpose

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common causes of an acute abdomen. The accuracies of the Alvarado and the acute inflammatory response (AIR) scores in the diagnosis of appendicitis is very low in Asian populations, so a new scoring system, the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) system, was designed recently. We applied and compared the Alvarado, AIR, and RIPASA scores in the diagnoses of appendicitis in the Iranian population.

Methods

We prospectively compared the RIPASA, Alvarado, and AIR systems by applying them to 100 patients. All the scores were calculated for patients who presented with right quadrant pain. Appendectomies were performed; then, the postoperative pathology reports were correlated with the scores. Scores of 8, 7, and 5 or more are optimal cutoffs for the RIPASA, Alvarado, and AIR scoring systems, respectively. The sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, negative predictive values (NPVs), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) for the 3 systems were determined.

Results

The sensitivity and the specificity of the RIPASA score were 93.18% and 91.67%, respectively. The sensitivities of the Alvarado and the AIR scores were both 78.41%. The specificities of the Alvarado and the AIR scores were 100% and 91.67%, respectively. The RIPASA score correctly classified 93% of all patients confirmed with histological AA compared with 78.41% for the Alvarado and the AIR scores.

Conclusion

The RIPASA scoring system had more sensitivity, better NPV, a positive LR, and a less negative LR for the Iranian population whereas the Alvarado scoring system was more specific.

Outcomes of Antibiotic Therapy for Uncomplicated Appendicitis in Pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study is to determine the feasibility and safety of antibiotics for uncomplicated simple appendicitis in pregnancy.

METHOD

We conducted a 6-year prospective observational study on 20 pregnant women in whom uncomplicated simple appendicitis (appendiceal diameter ≤11 mm and with no signs of appendicoliths, perforation, or abscess) was radiologically verified and managed with a 4-day course of antibiotics. Treatment failure rate, defined as the need for an appendectomy during hospitalization and recurrence in the follow-up period (median 25 months), and maternal or fetal complications during the pregnancy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 33.4 years, and gestational age was 17.8 weeks. Three patients failed to respond to antibiotic therapy during hospitalization and underwent subsequent appendectomy (2 suppurative and 1 perforated appendicitis). There was 1 wound infection postoperatively. During follow-up, 2 patients during their ongoing pregnancy experienced recurrence at 3 and 6 months post-treatment, and a new course of antibiotics was determined. Patients also experienced recurrence at 8 and 10 months post-treatment and underwent appendectomy. Treatment failure occurred in 5 patients (25%) with no fetal complications during the pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis in pregnancy may be a feasible treatment option without severe maternal and fetal complications.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of CT Features for Differentiating Complicated and Uncomplicated Appendicitis

Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify computed tomographic (CT) features for differentiating complicated appendicitis in patients suspected of having appendicitis and to summarize their diagnostic accuracy. Materials and Methods Studies on diagnostic accuracy of CT features for differentiating complicated appendicitis (perforated or gangrenous appendicitis) in patients suspected of having appendicitis were searched in Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Overlapping descriptors used in different studies to denote the same image finding were subsumed under a single CT feature. Pooled diagnostic accuracy of the CT features was calculated by using a bivariate random effects model. CT features with pooled diagnostic odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals not including 1 were considered as informative. Results Twenty-three studies were included, and 184 overlapping descriptors for various CT findings were subsumed under 14 features. Of these, 10 features were informative for complicated appendicitis. There was a general tendency for these features to show relatively high specificity but low sensitivity. Extraluminal appendicolith, abscess, appendiceal wall enhancement defect, extraluminal air, ileus, periappendiceal fluid collection, ascites, intraluminal air, and intraluminal appendicolith showed pooled specificity greater than 70% (range, 74%-100%), but sensitivity was limited (range, 14%-59%). Periappendiceal fat stranding was the only feature that showed high sensitivity (94%; 95% confidence interval: 86%, 98%) but low specificity (40%; 95% confidence interval, 23%, 60%). Conclusion Ten informative CT features for differentiating complicated appendicitis were identified in this study, nine of which showed high specificity, but low sensitivity. ^© RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Initial non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis in children: a protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (APAC trial)

INTRODUCTION

Based on epidemiological, immunological and pathology data, the idea that appendicitis is not necessarily a progressive disease is gaining ground. Two types are distinguished: simple and complicated appendicitis. Non-operative treatment (NOT) of children with simple appendicitis has been investigated in several small studies. So far, it is deemed safe. However, its effectiveness and effect on quality of life (QoL) have yet to be established in an adequately powered randomised trial. In this article, we provide the study protocol for the APAC (Antibiotics versus Primary Appendectomy in Children) trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial randomises children aged 7-17 years with imaging-confirmed simple appendicitis between appendectomy and NOT. Patients are recruited in 15 hospitals. The intended sample size, based on the primary outcome, rate of complications and a non-inferiority margin of 5%, is 334 patients.NOT consists of intravenous antibiotics for 48-72 hours, daily blood tests and ultrasound follow-up. If the patient meets the predefined discharge criteria, antibiotic treatment is continued orally at home. Primary outcome is the rate of complications at 1-year follow-up. An independent adjudication committee will assess all complications and their relation to the allocated treatment. Secondary outcomes include, but are not limited to, delayed appendectomies, QoL, pain and (in)direct costs.The primary outcome will be analysed both according to the intention-to-treat principle and the per-protocol principle, and is presented with a one-sided 97.5% CI. We will use multiple logistic and linear regression for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively, to adjust for stratification factors.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam. Data monitoring is performed by an independent institute and a Data Safety Monitoring Board has been assigned. Results will be presented in peer-reviewed academic journals and at (international) conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02848820; NTR5977; Pre-results.

A prospective non-randomized controlled, multicenter trial comparing Appendectomy and Conservative Treatment for Patients with Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis (the ACTUAA study)

PURPOSE

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of lower abdominal pain and admissions to the emergency department. Over the past 20 years, there has been a renewed interest in the conservative management of uncomplicated AA, and several studies demonstrated that an antibiotic-first strategy is a viable treatment option for uncomplicated AA. The aim of this prospective non-randomized controlled, multicenter trial is to compare antibiotic therapy and emergency appendectomy as treatment for patients with uncomplicated AA confirmed by US and/or CT or MRI scan.

METHODS

All adult patients in the age range 18 to 65 years with suspected AA, consecutively admitted to the Surgical Department of the 13 participating Italian Hospitals, will be invited to take part in the study. A multicenter prospective collected registry developed by surgeons, radiologists, and pathologists with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis represents the best research method to assess the long-term role of antibiotics in the management of the disease. Comparison will be made between surgical and antibiotic-first approaches to uncomplicated AA through the analysis of the primary outcome measure of complication-free treatment success rate based on 1-year follow-up. Quality of life, length of hospital stay, pain evaluation, and time to return to normal activity will be evaluated as secondary outcome measures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03080103.

Laparoscopic Procedure is Not Independently Associated With the Development of Intra-Abdominal Abscess After Appendectomy: A Multicenter Cohort Study With Propensity Score Matching Analysis

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify independent risk factors for postoperative intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) after appendectomy for patients with acute appendicitis.

BACKGRAOUND

Although laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been performed universally, whether LA is associated with an increased incidence of postoperative IAA compared with open appendectomy (OA) remains controversial, which causes some surgeons' increasing concerns.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 6805 consecutive adult patients with acute appendicitis who underwent LA or OA at 7 general hospitals in China. Patient characteristics, operative variables, and surgical outcomes were collected and compared between patients who underwent LA and OA. Propensity score matching analysis was used to minimize the bias in patient selection differing from various procedure of appendectomy. Independent risk factors associated with the development of postoperative IAA after appendectomy were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis in the propensity matched cohort.

RESULTS

Over a 3-year period, 2710 (39.8%) and 4095 (60.2%) patients underwent LA and OA respectively. Patients who underwent OA had more males, American Society of Anesthesiologists score 2-3, preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and perforated appendicitis than those who underwent LA (all P<0.01). Propensity score matched analysis created 2542 pairs of patients. Univariate analysis revealed that patients who underwent LA had a higher incidence of postoperative IAA than patients who underwent OA (6.7% vs. 5.3%; P=0.039). However, multivariate logistic regression analysis identified LA not to be an independent risk factor associated with the development of postoperative IAA (odds ratio, 1.053; 95% confidence interval, 0.922-1.657; P=0.216).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study identified that laparoscopic procedure was not an independent risk factor associated with the development of postoperative IAA after appendectomy of acute appendicitis. Therefore, concerns of increased incidence of IAA because of laparoscopic procedure are unwarranted.

Nonoperative management in children with early acute appendicitis: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Appendectomy has remained the gold standard treatment of acute appendicitis for more than 100years. Nonoperative management (NOM) has been shown to be a valid treatment alternative for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in adults. A systematic review of available evidence comparing operative management (OM) and NOM in children with acute uncomplicated appendicitis was performed.

METHODS

Systematic searches of MedLine, Embase, and a clinical trial register (https://clinicaltrials.gov/) were performed in March 2016. Only articles that studied NOM for uncomplicated appendicitis in children were included. Data generation was performed independently by two authors, and quality was assessed using the rating schema by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

15 articles were selected: four retrospective analyses, four prospective cohort studies, four prospective nonrandomized comparative trials and one randomized controlled trial (RCT). Initial success of the NOM groups (a cure within two weeks of intervention) ranged from 58 to 100%, with 0.1-31.8% recurrence at one year.

CONCLUSION

Although present literature is scarce, publications support the feasibility of further studies investigating NOM of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children. Higher quality prospective RCTs with larger sample sizes and robust randomization methods, studying the noninferiority of NOM with antibiotics compared with OM are required to establish its utility.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

This manuscript is a systematic review and thus assigned the lowest evidence used from the manuscripts analyzed which is a Level IV.

Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Management

OBJECTIVE

Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs) are a rare and heterogeneous disease for which clinical management is challenging. We aim to review the literature regarding modalities of treatment to guide the management of AMNs.

METHODS AND REVIEW CRITERIA

We conducted a PubMed search in February 2016 for English-language publications, using the terms "appendiceal," "appendix," "carcinoma," "cancer," "mucinous," "treatment," "genes," "target," "genomic," and terms listed in the articles' subheadings. Published reports and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings were also searched.

RESULTS

In this review, we summarize current data and controversies in AMN classification, clinical presentation, molecular alterations, treatment outcomes with regard to cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and the role of systemic chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms are a heterogeneous group of tumors with a rising incidence. Treatment is based on stage and histology. Low-grade tumors are treated surgically with resection of the primary site in early stage disease, or peritoneal debulking and HIPEC in patients with advanced stage disease. Treatment of high-grade tumors requires further prospective trials, and options include debulking surgery and HIPEC with or without preoperative chemotherapy. Trials evaluating novel therapies based on the molecular profiling of AMN tumors are needed to evaluate therapeutic options in patients who are not surgical candidates.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This review provides a reference to guide gastroenterologists, pathologists, surgeons, and oncologists in the management of appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs), a rare and heterogeneous disease with no consensus on histologic classification or guidelines for treatment algorithms. This review summarizes all AMN classifications and proposes a treatment algorithm based on stage and histology of disease.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy

Acute appendicitis (AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Non-operative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient's factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon's skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner (i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.

Randomized clinical trial of Appendicitis Inflammatory Response score-based management of patients with suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The role of imaging in the diagnosis of appendicitis is controversial. This prospective interventional study and nested randomized trial analysed the impact of implementing a risk stratification algorithm based on the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score, and compared routine imaging with selective imaging after clinical reassessment.

METHOD

Patients presenting with suspicion of appendicitis between September 2009 and January 2012 from age 10 years were included at 21 emergency surgical centres and from age 5 years at three university paediatric centres. Registration of clinical characteristics, treatments and outcomes started during the baseline period. The AIR score-based algorithm was implemented during the intervention period. Intermediate-risk patients were randomized to routine imaging or selective imaging after clinical reassessment.

RESULTS

The baseline period included 1152 patients, and the intervention period 2639, of whom 1068 intermediate-risk patients were randomized. In low-risk patients, use of the AIR score-based algorithm resulted in less imaging (19·2 versus 34·5 per cent; P < 0·001), fewer admissions (29·5 versus 42·8 per cent; P < 0·001), and fewer negative explorations (1·6 versus 3·2 per cent; P = 0·030) and operations for non-perforated appendicitis (6·8 versus 9·7 per cent; P = 0·034). Intermediate-risk patients randomized to the imaging and observation groups had the same proportion of negative appendicectomies (6·4 versus 6·7 per cent respectively; P = 0·884), number of admissions, number of perforations and length of hospital stay, but routine imaging was associated with an increased proportion of patients treated for appendicitis (53·4 versus 46·3 per cent; P = 0·020).

CONCLUSION

AIR score-based risk classification can safely reduce the use of diagnostic imaging and hospital admissions in patients with suspicion of appendicitis. Registration number: NCT00971438 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Unexpected Appendiceal Pathologies and Their Changes With the Expanding Use of Preoperative Imaging Studies

Purpose

The preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis is often challenging. Sometimes, pathologic results of the appendix embarrass or confuse surgeons. Therefore, more and more imaging studies are being performed to increase the accuracy of appendicitis diagnoses preoperatively. However, data on the effect of this increase in preoperative imaging studies on diagnostic accuracy are limited. We performed this study to explore unexpected appendiceal pathologies and to delineate the role of preoperative imaging studies in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Methods

The medical records of 4,673 patients who underwent an appendectomy for assumed appendicitis between 1997 and 2012 were reviewed retrospectively. Pathological results and preoperative imaging studies were surveyed, and the frequencies of pathological results and preoperative imaging studies were investigated.

Results

The overall rate of pathology compatible with acute appendicitis was 84.4%. Unexpected pathological findings, such as normal histology, specific inflammations other than acute appendicitis, neoplastic lesions, and other pathologies, comprised 9.6%, 3.3%, 1.2%, and 1.5%, respectively. The rate of unexpected pathological results was significantly reduced because of the increase in preoperative imaging studies. The decrease in normal appendices contributed the most to the reduction while other unexpected pathologies did not change significantly despite the increased use of imaging studies. This decrease in normal appendices was significant in both male and female patients under the age of 60 years, but the differences in females were more prominent.

Conclusion

Unexpected appendiceal pathologies comprised 15.6% of the cases. Preoperative imaging studies reduced them by decreasing the negative appendectomy rate of patients with normal appendices.

Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess

BACKGROUND

Appendiceal phlegmon and abscess account for 2% to 10% of acute appendicitis. People with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess usually need an appendicectomy to relieve their symptoms and avoid complications. The timing of appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess, in terms of overall morbidity and mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 7), MEDLINE Ovid (1950 to 23 August 2016), Embase Ovid (1974 to 23 August 2016), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 23 August 2016), and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 23 August 2016). We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal (23 August 2016) and ClinicalTrials.gov (23 August 2016) for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all individual and cluster-randomised controlled trials, irrespective of language, publication status, or age of participants, comparing early versus delayed appendicectomy in people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included two randomised controlled trials with a total of 80 participants in this review. 1. Early versus delayed open appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmonForty participants (paediatric and adults) with appendiceal phlegmon were randomised either to early appendicectomy (appendicectomy as soon as appendiceal mass resolved within the same admission) (n = 20), or to delayed appendicectomy (initial conservative treatment followed by interval appendicectomy six weeks later) (n = 20). The trial was at high risk of bias. There was no mortality in either group. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effect of using either early or delayed open appendicectomy onoverall morbidity (RR 13.00; 95% CI 0.78 to 216.39; very low-quality evidence), the proportion of participants who developed wound infection (RR 9.00; 95% CI 0.52 to 156.91; very low quality evidence) or faecal fistula (RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.13 to 69.52; very low quality evidence). The quality of evidence for increased length of hospital stay and time away from normal activities in the early appendicectomy group (MD 6.70 days; 95% CI 2.76 to 10.64, and MD 5.00 days; 95% CI 1.52 to 8.48, respectively) is very low quality evidence. The trial reported neither quality of life nor pain outcomes. 2. Early versus delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendiceal abscessForty paediatric participants with appendiceal abscess were randomised either to early appendicectomy (emergent laparoscopic appendicectomy) (n = 20) or to delayed appendicectomy (initial conservative treatment followed by interval laparoscopic appendicectomy 10 weeks later) (n = 20). The trial was at high risk of bias. The trial did not report on overall morbidity or complications. There was no mortality in either group. We do not have sufficient evidence to determine the effects of using either early or delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for outcomes relating to hospital stay between the groups (MD -0.20 days; 95% CI -3.54 to 3.14; very low quality of evidence). Health-related quality of life was measured with the Pediatric Quality of Life Scale-Version 4.0 questionnaire (a scale of 0 to 100 with higher values indicating a better quality of life). Health-related quality of life score measured at 12 weeks after appendicectomy was higher in the early appendicectomy group than in the delayed appendicectomy group (MD 12.40 points; 95% CI 9.78 to 15.02) but the quality of evidence was very low. This trial reported neither the pain nor the time away from normal activities.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is unclear whether early appendicectomy prevents complications compared to delayed appendicectomy for people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. The evidence indicating increased length of hospital stay and time away from normal activities in people with early open appendicectomy is of very low quality. The evidence for better health-related quality of life following early laparoscopic appendicectomy compared with delayed appendicectomy is based on very low quality evidence. For both comparisons addressed in this review, data are sparse, and we cannot rule out significant benefits or harms of early versus delayed appendicectomy.Further trials on this topic are urgently needed and should specify a set of criteria for use of antibiotics, percutaneous drainage of the appendiceal abscess prior to surgery and resolution of the appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. Future trials should include outcomes such as time away from normal activities, quality of life and the length of hospital stay.

Acute appendicitis, inflammatory appendiceal mass and the risk of a hidden malignant tumor: a systematic review of the literature

Introduction

Acute appendicitis is significantly common. Despite the increased use of computed tomography, the number of perforated cases has been stable in the past three decades. Between 2% and 6% of patients with acute appendicitis present appendiceal mass, often described as inflammatory phlegmon or abscess. Malignant tumors are confirmed by pathological analysis in 0.9–1.4% of all appendectomies performed to treat acute appendicitis. However, recent series demonstrate an elevated incidence of malignancies, ranging from 5.9 to 12%, in patients with inflammatory appendiceal mass.

Methods

The analysis was based on a systematic review of the literature. The articles were searched in PubMed for the period from 1987 to 2016. Articles presenting the incidence of the hidden malignancy among patients with appendiceal inflammatory mass were selected. Variables as age, interval appendectomy rate, the incidence of neoplasm, time to surgery, minimally invasive assessment, histology, right colectomy rate and morbidity were analyzed.

Results

A total of 13.244 patients were described as presenting acute appendicitis. Appendiceal tumor is present in approximately 1% of the appendectomies, while the rate of neoplasm varies from 10 to 29% in patients presenting appendiceal inflammatory mass. Interval appendectomies, despite been the minority of the procedures, disregard the higher morbidity associated with right sided colectomies. The review of literature also describes oncologic, histologic and clinical aspects of patients presenting appendiceal neoplasm, describing the most frequent histologic subtypes of this illness.

Conclusion

Hidden appendiceal neoplasm in acute appendicitis are rare, fortunately. However, its incidence is much higher in patients presenting appendiceal inflammatory mass. Hence, interval appendectomy should be considered in this subgroup of patients.

Predictors of a histopathologic diagnosis of complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Despite its utilization, the intraoperative (IO) assessment of complicated appendicitis (CA) is subjective. The histopathologic (HP) diagnosis should be the gold standard in identifying patients with CA; however, it is not immediately available to guide postoperative management. The objective of this study was to identify predictors of an HP diagnosis of CA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent appendectomy at our institution from 2011-2013 was conducted. CA was defined by perforation or abscess on pathology report. Predictors of an HP diagnosis of CA were evaluated using a multivariable regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 239 of 1066 patients had CA based on IO assessment, whereas 143 of 239 patients (60%) had CA on HP and IO assessment. On multivariable analysis, an IO diagnosis of CA was associated with an HP diagnosis of CA (odds ratio [OR]: 10.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.19-16.58). Other risk factors were age (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.09-1.49), number of days of pain (OR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.07-1.37), increased heart rate (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.02-1.26), appendix size (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.03-1.16), and an appendicolith (OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.12-2.71) on preoperative CT imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to age, increased heart rate, pain duration, appendix size and appendicolith, the IO assessment is also associated with an HP diagnosis of CA; however, 40% of patients were incorrectly classified. Using these predictors with improved IO grading may achieve more accurate diagnosis of CA.

The Accuracy of Emergency Physicians in Ultrasonographic Screening of Acute Appendicitis; a Cross Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic values reported for ultrasonographic screening of acute appendicitis vary widely and are dependent on the operator's skill, patient's gender, weight, etc. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of operator skill on the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography in detection of appendicitis by comparing the results of ultrasonography done by radiologists and emergency physicians.

METHODS

This prospective diagnostic accuracy was carried out on patients suspected to acute appendicitis presenting to EDs of 2 hospitals. After the initial clinical examinations, all the patients underwent ultrasonography for appendicitis by emergency physician and radiologist, respectively. The final diagnosis of appendicitis was based on either pathology report or 48-hour follow-up. Screening performance characteristics of appendix ultrasonography by emergency physician and radiologist were compared using STATA 11.0 software.

RESULTS

108 patients with the mean age of 23.91 ± 7.46 years were studied (61.1% male). Appendicitis was confirmed for 37 (34.26%) cases. Cohen's kappa coefficient between ultrasonography by the radiologist and emergency physician in diagnosis of acute appendicitis was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.35 - 0.76). Area under the ROC curve of ultrasonography in appendicitis diagnosis was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69 - 0.86) for emergency physician and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 - 0.94) for radiologist (p = 0.052). Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography by radiologist and emergency physician in appendicitis diagnosis were 83.87% (95% CI: 67.32 - 93.23), 91.5% (95% CI: 81.89 - 96.52), 72.97% (95% CI: 55.61 - 85.63), and 83.10% (95% CI: 71.94 - 90.59), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Findings of the present study showed that the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography carried out by radiologist (89%) is a little better compared to that of emergency physician (80%) in diagnosis of appendicitis, but none are excellent.

Use of Computed Tomography to Determine Perforation in Patients With Acute Appendicitis

PURPOSE

Urgent appendectomy has long been the standard of care for acute appendicitis. Six randomized trials have demonstrated that antibiotics can safely treat appendicitis, but approximately 1 in 4 of these patients eventually requires appendectomy. Overall treatment success may be limited by complex disease including perforation. Patients׳ success on antibiotic therapy may depend on preoperative identification of complex disease on imaging. However, the effectiveness of computed tomography (CT) in differentiating complex disease including perforated from nonperforated appendicitis remains to be determined. The purpose of this study was to assess the preoperative diagnostic accuracy of CT in determining appendiceal perforation in patients operated for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of pathology and radiology reports from consecutive patients who presented to the emergency department with suspicion for acute appendicitis between January 2012 and May 2015. CT scans were re-reviewed by abdominal imaging fellowship-trained radiologists using standardized criteria, and the radiologists were blinded to pathology and surgical findings. Radiologists specifically noted presence or absence of periappendiceal gas, abscess, appendicolith, fat stranding, and bowel wall thickening. The overall radiologic impression as well as these specific imaging findings was compared to results of pathology and operative reports. Pathology reports were considered the standard for diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients (65% male, average age of 34 years) presenting with right lower quadrant pain underwent CT imaging and prompt appendectomy. Final pathology reported perforation in 48% (n = 43) of cases. Radiologic diagnosis of perforation was reported in 9% (n = 8), correctly identifying perforation in 37.5% (n = 3), and incorrectly reporting perforation in 62.5% of nonperforated cases per pathology. Radiology missed 93% (n = 40) of perforations postoperatively diagnosed by pathology. There was no secondary finding (fat stranding, diameter >13mm, abscess, cecal wall thickening, periappendiceal gas, simple fluid collection, appendicolith, and phlegmon) with a clinically reliable sensitivity or specificity to predict perforated appendicitis. Surgeon׳s report of perforation was consistent with the pathology report of perforation in only 28% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The usefulness of a CT for determining perforation in acute appendicitis is limited, and methods to improve precision in identifying patients with complicated appendicitis should be explored as this may help for improving risk prediction for failure of treatment with antibiotic therapy and help guide patients and providers in shared decision-making for treatment options.

Incidence of Appendicitis over Time: A Comparative Analysis of an Administrative Healthcare Database and a Pathology-Proven Appendicitis Registry

Importance

At the turn of the 21^st century, studies evaluating the change in incidence of appendicitis over time have reported inconsistent findings.

Objectives

We compared the differences in the incidence of appendicitis derived from a pathology registry versus an administrative database in order to validate coding in administrative databases and establish temporal trends in the incidence of appendicitis.

Design

We conducted a population-based comparative cohort study to identify all individuals with appendicitis from 2000 to2008.

Setting & Participants

Two population-based data sources were used to identify cases of appendicitis: 1) a pathology registry (n = 8,822); and 2) a hospital discharge abstract database (n = 10,453).

Intervention & Main Outcome

The administrative database was compared to the pathology registry for the following a priori analyses: 1) to calculate the positive predictive value (PPV) of administrative codes; 2) to compare the annual incidence of appendicitis; and 3) to assess differences in temporal trends. Temporal trends were assessed using a generalized linear model that assumed a Poisson distribution and reported as an annual percent change (APC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified by perforated and non-perforated appendicitis.

Results

The administrative database (PPV = 83.0%) overestimated the incidence of appendicitis (100.3 per 100,000) when compared to the pathology registry (84.2 per 100,000). Codes for perforated appendicitis were not reliable (PPV = 52.4%) leading to overestimation in the incidence of perforated appendicitis in the administrative database (34.8 per 100,000) as compared to the pathology registry (19.4 per 100,000). The incidence of appendicitis significantly increased over time in both the administrative database (APC = 2.1%; 95% CI: 1.3, 2.8) and pathology registry (APC = 4.1; 95% CI: 3.1, 5.0).

Conclusion & Relevance

The administrative database overestimated the incidence of appendicitis, particularly among perforated appendicitis. Therefore, studies utilizing administrative data to analyze perforated appendicitis should be interpreted cautiously.

Negative Appendectomy: Clinical and Economic Implications

Historically, performing a negative appendectomy (NA) was justified to reduce the incidence of perforation. Furthermore, it is also believed that NA is associated with minimal morbidity and cost. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical characteristics, and economic implications of NA. We reviewed the inpatient admissions on 274,405 patients who underwent nonincidental appendectomy as their primary procedure from the California State Inpatient Databases (2005–2011). Overall, 96.9 per cent had appendicitis (nonperforated = 73.1%, perforated = 23.8% and 3.1%) had NA. NA rates decreased steadily from 4.2 per cent in 2005 to 2.5 per cent in 2011 ( P < 0.01). The rates of appendectomy for perforated appendicitis rates also decreased slightly from 25.3 to 23.3 per cent during this time ( P = <0.01). Multivariate regression showed that female gender, African American race, and public insurance were all associated with increased NA rates. Compared with patients with appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis, NA was associated with longer length of stay (NA = 3.2 days vs nonperforated = 1.7 days), higher median cost per admission (NA = $8626 vs nonperforated = $7605), and higher morbidity (4.7 vs 1.9%), all P < 0.01. Contrary to classic justification for NA, we did not find an inverse association of appendectomy for perforated appendicitis and NA at the hospital level. In conclusion, NA is associated with substantial clinical and financial burden, while having no apparent impact on lowering the rate of appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.

Misdiagnosing adult appendicitis: clinical, cost, and socioeconomic implications of negative appendectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical, financial, and socioeconomic factors associated with negative appendectomy (NA).

METHODS

Data were obtained from the California State Inpatient Database (2005 to 2011). Patients (≥18 years) who underwent nonincidental appendectomies (n = 180,958) were evaluated with multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

NA rates decreased from 4.5% in 2005 to 2.8% in 2011 (P < .01). Compared with patients with nonperforated appendicitis, NA was associated with longer length of stay, higher morbidity, and higher hospital costs. Multivariate regression demonstrated that African Americans, younger age (18 to 29 years), and females were predictors of NA. Hispanics and patients with public or no insurance were associated with a lower NA rate; however, perforation rates were higher.

CONCLUSIONS

NA was associated with higher cost, longer length of stay, and higher morbidity compared with nonperforated appendicitis. Lower NA rates but higher perforation rates in some populations suggest a delay in presentation. Further research is needed to understand these disparities and to improve quality of care among low-income minority patients.

Predictive factors and outcomes of negative appendectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess predictive factors for negative appendectomy and to evaluate the outcomes of negative appendectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 4,878 patients who underwent appendectomy at our institution from January 2008 to December 2014 was performed.

RESULTS

Younger age (≤15 years), normal white blood cell count, appendix diameter of less than 6 mm on computed tomography (CT), and CT grade less than 3 were found to be independent predictive factors for negative appendectomy. When complications were investigated according to the results of pathologic diagnosis, negative appendectomy had more complications than appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis, and this was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

When CT findings are equivocal, in deciding to operate for acute appendicitis, additional ultrasonography can be performed. Furthermore, if the patient is younger than 15 years and the white blood cell count is normal, it is recommended to monitor changes in symptoms a little longer rather than operating hastily.

WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.

Is preoperative distinction between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis feasible without imaging?

BACKGROUND

One of the main aims of appendicitis research is the differential diagnostics between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis that enable provision of the optimal treatment for each patient.

METHODS

Data in the present study were collected prospectively in our randomized antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis trial (APPAC) comparing surgery and antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (NCT01022567). We evaluated 705 patients who had acute appendicitis on computed tomography. Patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis (n = 368) were compared with all complicated acute appendicitis patients (n = 337), and subgroup analyses were performed between uncomplicated acute appendicitis and an appendicolith appendicitis (CA1; n = 256) and uncomplicated acute appendicitis and perforation and/or abscess (CA2; n = 78). Age, sex, body temperature (°C), duration of symptoms, white blood cell count (E9/L), and C-reactive protein (mg/L) were recorded on admission. Receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and temperature.

RESULTS

CA2 patients had significantly greater C-reactive protein levels (mean 122 and 47, respectively, P < .001) and longer duration of symptoms than uncomplicated acute appendicitis patients; 81% of CA2 patients and 38% of uncomplicated acute appendicitis patients had symptoms >24 hours before admission (P < .001). In receiver operating characteristic analysis, C-reactive protein and temperature had clinically significant results only in comparison with uncomplicated acute appendicitis and CA2 (area under the curve >0.7), but no optimum cutoff points could be identified.

CONCLUSION

In clinical decision making, neither clinical findings nor laboratory markers are reliable enough to estimate the severity of the acute appendicitis accurately or to determine the presence of an appendicolith. The current results emphasize the role of computed tomography in the differential diagnosis of complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Acute appendicitis in overweight patients: the role of preoperative imaging

Background

The diagnosis of acute appendicitis in overweight patients is challenging due to the limited value of the clinical examination. The benefits of ultrasonography and abdominal CT have been studied in the general population, but there is limited data regarding their use in overweight and obese patients with suspected appendicitis. This study analyzes the role of preoperative radiological modalities in overweight patients with suspected appendicitis.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively acquired database including 705 patients operated for suspected acute appendicitis. Patients were divided into two groups according to their BMI (BMI ≥25 kg/m² (n = 242) and BMI <25 kg/m² (n = 463)). The use of preoperative radiological modalities, laboratory findings and outcome parameters were analyzed.

Results

Ultrasonography was the preferred radiological assessment in our cohort (68 % in BMI <25 kg/m and 52.4 % in BMI ≥25 kg/m²). However, it was non-conclusive in 42 % of overweight as compared to 6 % in patients with a BMI < 25 (p < 0.0001). This difference was particularly obvious between female patients (8 % of non-conclusive US for BMI <25 kg/m² vs 52 % for BMI ≥25 kg/m², p < 0.0001). Significantly more CT scans were performed in overweight patients (37 % vs. 20 %; p <0.0001). The accuracy of CT did not differ according to BMI (85 % vs. 88 %; p = 0.76). Preoperative radiological imaging did not significantly delay surgery. Laparoscopy was the preferred approach for both groups (98.2 % vs 98.7 %, P = 0.86) with an overall conversion rate of 4 %. The overall rate of negative appendectomy was 10 %.

Conclusions

The role of ultrasonography in patients with BMI ≥25 kg/m² with suspected acute appendicitis is questionable due to its high rate of non-conclusive findings. Therefore, abdominal CT scans should be preferred to investigate suspected appendicitis in overweight patient if clinical findings are not conclusive.

Computed tomography to operating room in less than 3 hours minimizes complications from appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study is to select patients with nonperforated appendicitis verified by computed tomography (CT) scan and to determine if there is a temporal component to perforation.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with CT scan evidence of nonperforated appendicitis from 2007 to 2012.

RESULTS

411 patients, aged 39.7 ± 16.25 years (47.5% male) were included in the study. 330 patients (80.3%) were nonperforated at surgery. Analysis of 3-hour intervals from CT scan to operating room (OR) revealed an absolute reduction in the rate of perforation from 27% at the 6- to 9-hour interval, to 17% and 10% at the 3- to 6-hour and 0- to 3-hour intervals, respectively, (P < .04). All organ space infections occurred in patients who were delayed to the OR greater than 3 hours. Mean length of hospitalization was .93 days and 2.81 days, respectively, in nonperforated and perforated appendicitis patients (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delays to the OR were associated with increased risk of perforation. Patients with uncomplicated appendicitis had shorter hospitalization and fewer postoperative wound infections.

Delaying surgery to perform CT scans for suspected appendicitis decreases the rate of negative appendectomies without increasing the rate of perforation nor postoperative complications

PURPOSE

Negative appendectomies are costly and are embedded with unnecessary risks for the patients. A careful indication for surgery seems mandatory even more so, since conservative therapy emerges as a potential alternative to surgery. The aims of this population-based study were to analyze whether radiological examinations for suspected appendicitis decreased the rate of negative appendectomies without increasing the rate of perforation or worsening postoperative outcomes.

METHOD

This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospective population-based database. The data collection included preoperative investigations and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Based on 2559 patients, the rate of negative appendectomies decreased significantly with the use of CT scan as compared to clinical evaluation only (9.3 vs 5 %, p = 0.019), whereas ultrasonography alone was not able to decrease this rate (9.3 vs 6.2 %, p = 0.074). Delaying surgery for radiological investigation did not increase the rate of perforation (18.1 vs 19.2 %; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.01; 0.8-1.3; p = 0.899). Postoperative complications (surgical reintervention, postoperative wound infection, postoperative hematoma, postoperative intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus) were all comparable.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study, CT scan was the only radiological modality that significantly reduced the rate of negative appendectomy. The delay induced by such additional imaging did not increase perforation nor complication rates. Abdominal CT scans for suspected appendicitis should therefore be more frequently used if clinical findings are unconclusive.