Safety and efficacy of antibiotics compared with appendicectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Feasible in a Public County Hospital?

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy is being used increasingly as a treatment option for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis. This was a prospective validation study in a large, urban, public safety-net hospital. From 2014 to 2016, all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis were enrolled in a prospective observational trial. Standard baseline perioperative practice (control group) was documented for 1 year. An outpatient appendectomy protocol was then introduced. Inclusion criteria required intraoperative confirmation of uncomplicated appendicitis and strict discharge criteria, including physician assessment before discharge. Data collection then continued for 1 year (outpatient group). The outcomes measures examined included complications, length of stay, nursing transitions, emergency department visits, readmissions, and patient satisfaction. The study enrolled 351 patients (178 control, 173 outpatient). Of the 173 candidates for outpatient appendectomy, 113 went home. Reasons for admission included surgeon discretion due to intraoperative findings/medical comorbidities and lack of transportation home. The outpatient group had shorter operative time (69 vs 83 minutes; p < 0.001), longer time in recovery (242 vs 141 minutes; p < 0.001), fewer nursing transitions (4 vs 5; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative length of stay (9 vs 19 hours; p < 0.001). There was no difference in complications, emergency department visits, or readmissions. In the outpatient group, none of the patients sent home from recovery had postoperative complications or required readmission. Satisfaction surveys revealed no change in satisfaction with either protocol. Outpatient appendectomy is safe in a public hospital and results in shorter hospital length of stay and decreased healthcare costs. Strict criteria for discharge are important to identify patients who should be admitted for observation.

Comparison of Antibiotic Therapy and Appendectomy for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis in Children: A Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis is effective in adult patients, but its application in pediatric patients remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of antibiotic treatment vs appendectomy as the primary therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in pediatric patients.

DATA SOURCES

The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized clinical trials were searched through April 17, 2016. The search was limited to studies published in English. Search terms included appendicitis, antibiotics, appendectomy, randomized controlled trial, controlled clinical trial, randomized, placebo, drug therapy, randomly, and trial.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials and prospective clinical controlled trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in pediatric patients (aged 5-18 years) were included in the meta-analysis. The outcomes included at least 2 of the following terms: success rate of antibiotic treatment and appendectomy, complications, readmissions, length of stay, total cost, and disability days.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers. The quality of the included studies was examined in accordance with the Cochrane guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa criteria. Data were pooled using a logistic fixed-effects model, and the subgroup pooled risk ratio with or without appendicolith was estimated.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the success rate of treatment. The hypothesis was formulated before data collection.

RESULTS

A total of 527 articles were screened. In 5 unique studies, 404 unique patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (aged 5-15 years) were enrolled. Nonoperative treatment was successful in 152 of 168 patients (90.5%), with a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects risk ratio of 8.92 (95% CI, 2.67-29.79; heterogeneity, P = .99; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that the risk for treatment failure in patients with appendicolith increased, with a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects risk ratio of 10.43 (95% CI, 1.46-74.26; heterogeneity, P = .91; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This meta-analysis shows that antibiotics as the initial treatment for pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis may be feasible and effective without increasing the risk for complications. However, the failure rate, mainly caused by the presence of appendicolith, is higher than for appendectomy. Surgery is preferably suggested for uncomplicated appendicitis with appendicolith.

Cost analysis of nonoperative management of acute appendicitis in children

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine if nonoperative management of acute appendicitis in children is more cost effective than appendectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of children (6-17years) with acute appendicitis treated nonoperatively (NOM) from May 2012 to May 2015 was compared to similar patients treated with laparoscopic appendectomy (OM) (IRB#107535). Inclusion criteria included symptoms ≤48h, localized peritonitis, and ultrasound confirmation of acute appendicitis. Variables analyzed included failure rates, complications, length of stay (LOS), and cost analysis.

RESULTS

26 NOM patients (30% female, mean age 12) and 26 OM patients (73% female, mean age 11) had similar median initial LOS (24.5h (NOM) vs 16.5h (OM), p=0.076). Median total LOS was significantly longer in the NOM group (34.5h (NOM) vs 17.5 (OM), p=0.01). Median cost of appendectomy was $1416.14 (range $781.24-$2729.97). 9/26 (35%) NOM patients underwent appendectomy for recurrent appendicitis. 4/26 (15%) OM patients were readmitted (postoperative abscess (n=2), Clostridium difficile colitis (n=1), postoperative nausea/vomiting (n=1)). Median initial hospital admission costs were significantly higher in the OM group ($3502.70 (OM) vs $1870.37 (NOM), p=0.004)). However, median total hospital costs were similar for both groups ($3708.68 (OM) vs $2698.99 (NOM), p=0.065)).

CONCLUSION

Although initial costs were significantly less in children with acute appendicitis managed nonoperatively, total costs were similar for both groups. The high failure rate of nonoperative management in this series contributed to the total increased cost in the NOM group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3b.

Methodological overview of systematic reviews to establish the evidence base for emergency general surgery

BACKGROUND

The evidence for treatment decision-making in emergency general surgery has not been summarized previously. The aim of this overview was to review the quantity and quality of systematic review evidence for the most common emergency surgical conditions.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of the most common conditions requiring unplanned admission and treatment managed by general surgeons were eligible for inclusion. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases were searched to April 2014. The number and type (randomized or non-randomized) of included studies and patients were extracted and summarized. The total number of unique studies was recorded for each condition. The nature of the interventions (surgical, non-surgical invasive or non-invasive) was documented. The quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

The 106 included reviews focused mainly on bowel conditions (42), appendicitis (40) and gallstone disease (17). Fifty-one (48·1 per cent) included RCTs alone, 79 (74·5 per cent) included at least one RCT and 25 (23·6 per cent) summarized non-randomized evidence alone. Reviews included 727 unique studies, of which 30·3 per cent were RCTs. Sixty-five reviews compared different types of surgical intervention and 27 summarized trials of surgical versus non-surgical interventions. Fifty-seven reviews (53·8 per cent) were rated as low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

This overview of reviews highlights the need for more and better research in this field.

Composition of the cellular infiltrate in patients with simple and complex appendicitis

BACKGROUND

It is now well established that there are two types of appendicitis: simple (nonperforating) and complex (perforating). This study evaluates differences in the composition of the immune cellular infiltrate in children with simple and complex appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 47 consecutive children undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis between January 2011 and December 2012 were included. Intraoperative criteria were used to identify patients with either simple or complex appendicitis and were confirmed histopathologically. Immune histochemical techniques were used to identify immune cell markers in the appendiceal specimens. Digital imaging analysis was performed using Image J.

RESULTS

In the specimens of patients with complex appendicitis, significantly more myeloperoxidase positive cells (neutrophils) (8.7% versus 1.2%, P < 0.001) were detected compared to patients with a simple appendicitis. In contrast, fewer CD8+ T cells (0.4% versus 1.3%, P = 0.016), CD20 + cells (2.9% versus 9.0%, P = 0.027), and CD21 + cells (0.2% versus 0.6%, P = 0.028) were present in tissue from patients with complex compared to simple appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in proinflammatory innate cells and decrease of adaptive cells in patients with complex appendicitis suggest potential aggravating processes in complex appendicitis. Further research into the underlying mechanisms may identify novel biomarkers to be able to differentiate simple and complex appendicitis.

Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic appendectomy: a Markov model

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery performed in the USA. Removal of a non-inflamed appendix during unrelated abdominal surgery (prophylactic or incidental appendectomy) can prevent the downstream risks and costs of appendicitis. It is unknown whether such a strategy could be cost saving for the health system.

METHODS

We considered hypothetical patient cohorts of varying ages from 18 to 80, undergoing elective laparoscopic abdominal and pelvic procedures. A Markov decision model using cost per life-year as the main outcome measure was constructed to simulate the trade-off between cost and risk of prophylactic appendectomy and the ongoing risk of developing appendicitis, with downstream costs and risks. Rates, probabilities, and costs of disease, treatment, and outcomes by patient age and gender were extracted from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using complications and costs of prophylactic appendectomy.

RESULTS

With our base-case assumptions, including added cost of prophylactic appendectomy of $660, we find that prophylactic removal of the appendix is cost saving for males aged 18-27 and females aged 18-28 undergoing elective surgery. The margin of cost savings depends on remaining life-years and increases exponentially with age: a 20-year-old female undergoing elective surgery could save $130 over a lifetime by undergoing prophylactic appendectomy, while a 40-year-old female would lose $130 over a lifetime. When the risk of the prophylactic appendectomy exceeds the risk of laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis or the cost exceeds $1080, it becomes more cost saving to forego the prophylactic procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic appendectomy can be cost saving for patients younger than age thirty undergoing elective laparoscopic abdominal and pelvic procedures.

Acute uncomplicated appendicitis study: rationale and protocol for a multicentre, prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of non-operative management in children with acute uncomplicated appendicitis

INTRODUCTION

This article presents an overview of a prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority study designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of non-operative management (NOM) with operative management in children with acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA). Here, we present the study protocol for this APRES study, a multicentre Australian study. The rationale and details of future analysis, in particular, non-inferiority calculations, cost-effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of each intervention.

DESIGN

A multicentre, prospective randomised controlled clinical trial, conducted in 2 Australian tertiary paediatric hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Children who meet the inclusion criteria of an age between 5 and 15 years and a clinical diagnosis of AUA will be invited to participate, and after consent will be randomised via a computer-based program into treatment groups. The study started in June 2016, and the target recruitment is 220 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Children in the control group will be treated with prophylactic antibiotics and appendicectomy, and those in the intervention group will be treated with antibiotic therapy alone. Primary outcome measures include unplanned or unnecessary operation and complications at 30 days. Secondary outcomes include longer term complications within 1 year, length of stay, time off work and school analgesic requirements and cost.

ANALYSIS

Data analyses will be on the intention-to-treat principle using non-inferiority analysis. Analysis will include the Pearson χ2 test for categorical variables and independent sample t-test or Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables. Non-inferiority for NOM will be tested using 1-sided Wald tests with an α level of 0.05.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The research has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Sydney Children's Hospital Network. In addition, results will be reported through academic journals, seminars and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02795793; ACTRN12616000788471.

Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive topiramate for schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To systematically examine the randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence regarding efficacy and tolerability of topiramate cotreatment with antipsychotics in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

METHODS

Random-effects meta-analysis of RCTs of topiramate cotreatment with antipsychotics vs. placebo/ongoing antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Standardized or weighted mean difference (SMD/WMD), risk ratio (RR) ±95% confidence intervals (CIs), and number needed to harm (NNH) were calculated.

RESULTS

Across 16 RCTs (n = 934, duration = 11.8 ± 5.6 weeks), topiramate outperformed the comparator regarding change/endpoint of total (SMD: -0.58, 95% CI: -0.82, -0.35, P < 0.00001), positive (SMD: -0.37, 95% CI: -0.61, -0.14, P = 0.002), negative (SMD: -0.58, 95% CI: -0.87, -0.29, P < 0.0001), and general symptoms (SMD: -0.68, 95% CI: -0.95, -0.40, P < 0.00001). Furthermore, topiramate was superior regarding body weight (WMD: -2.75 kg, 95% CI: -4.03, -1.47, P < 0.0001), body mass index (BMI) (WMD: -1.77, 95% CI: -2.38, -1.15, P < 0.00001), triglycerides (P = 0.006), and insulin levels (P < 0.00001). Superiority regarding psychopathology and body weight/BMI was consistent across Chinese/Asian and Western RCTs, double-blind and open designs, clozapine and non-clozapine cotreatment, augmentation and co-initiation RCTs, and higher and lower quality RCTs. In meta-regression analyses, topiramate's efficacy for total symptoms was moderated by shorter illness duration (P = 0.047), while weight loss was greater in prevention/co-initiation vs. intervention/augmentation RCTs (-4.11 kg, 95% CI: -6.70, -1.52 vs. -1.41 kg, 95% CI: -2.23, -0.59, P < 0.001). All-cause discontinuation was similar between topiramate and comparators (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.81, P = 0.16). While topiramate led to more concentration/attention difficulties (P = 0.03, NNH = 8, 95% CI=4-25), psychomotor slowing (P = 0.02, NNH = 7, 95% CI = 4-25), and paresthesia (P = 0.05, NNH = 2, 95% CI = 4-33), it led to less ≥7% weight gain (P = 0.0001, NNH = 2, 95% CI = 2-3) and constipation (P = 0.04, NNH = 9, 95% CI = 5-100) than the comparator.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that adjunctive topiramate to antipsychotics is an effective and safe treatment choice for symptomatic improvement and weight reduction in patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

Acute appendicitis: Epidemiology, treatment and outcomes- analysis of 16544 consecutive cases

AIM

To investigate the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of acute appendicitis (AA) in a large population study.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study derived from the administrative dataset of the Bergamo district healthcare system (more than 1 million inhabitants) from 1997 to 2013. Data about treatment, surgery, length of stay were collected. Moreover for each patients were registered data about relapse of appendicitis and hospital admission due to intestinal obstruction.

RESULTS

From 1997 to 2013 in the Bergamo district we collected 16544 cases of AA, with a crude incidence rate of 89/100000 inhabitants per year; mean age was 24.51 ± 16.17, 54.7% were male and the mean Charlson’s comorbidity index was 0.32 ± 0.92. Mortality was < 0.0001%. Appendectomy was performed in 94.7% of the patients and the mean length of stay was 5.08 ± 2.88 d; the cumulative hospital stay was 5.19 ± 3.36 d and 1.2% of patients had at least one further hospitalization due intestinal occlusion. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 48% of cases. Percent of 5.34 the patients were treated conservatively with a mean length of stay of 3.98 ± 3.96 d; the relapse rate was 23.1% and the cumulative hospital stay during the study period was 5.46 ± 6.05 d.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of acute appendicitis in Northern Italy is slowly changing, with the large diffusion of laparoscopic approach; conservative treatment of non-complicated appendicitis is still a neglected option, but rich of promising results.

Appendicitis in Cancer Patients is often Observed and Can Represent Appendiceal Malignancy

Appendectomy is standard of care for uncomplicated appendicitis, but cancer patients may not be optimal surgical candidates. Interval appendectomy is controversial, and appendiceal malignancy is rare. Study objectives were to review the role of surgery, observation, and interventional radiology (IR)-guided drainage in patients with appendicitis and advanced malignancy. Retrospective review was performed on cancer patients presenting to a tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2014. Patients diagnosed with appendicitis were assigned to observation, surgery, and IR drainage after surgical evaluation. Success rates of initial treatment strategies were calculated. Rates of interval appendectomies and pathology were reviewed. Of 72 consults, 32 patients were included. Median age was 53 years, 50 per cent (16/32) were male, 50 per cent (16/32) had chemotherapy less than six weeks to presentation, and 63 per cent (20/32) had advanced stage malignancy. Of the 62.5 per cent (20/32) observed, 25 per cent (8/32) received immediate surgery, 12.5 per cent (4/32) required IR drainage, and 69 per cent (22/32) of patients were initially managed without surgery. Interval appendectomy rate was 19 per cent (6/32). Pathology confirmed appendiceal malignancies in 9.3 per cent (3/32). Cancer patients with acute appendicitis are frequently observed. High incidence of appendiceal malignancy may be due to the older median age. Interval appendectomy should be considered in this population.

Validity of predictive factors of acute complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Our previous retrospective study revealed the three preoperative predictors of complicated appendicitis (perforated or gangrenous appendicitis), which are body temperature ≥37.4 °C, C-reactive protein ≥4.7 mg/dl, and fluid collection surrounding the appendix on computed tomography. We reported here an additional prospective study to verify our ability to predict complicated appendicitis using the three preoperative predictors and thus facilitate better informed decisions regarding emergency surgery during night or holiday shifts.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 116 adult patients who underwent surgery for acute appendicitis from January 2013 to October 2014. Ninety patients with one or more predictive factors of complicated appendicitis underwent immediate surgery regardless of the time of patient's presentation. Twenty-six patients had no predictive factors and thus were suspected to have uncomplicated appendicitis. Of the 26 patients, 14 who presented to our hospital during office hours underwent immediate surgery. The other 12 patients who presented to our hospital at night or on a holiday underwent short, in-hospital delayed surgery during office hours.

RESULTS

All patients with no predictive factors had uncomplicated appendicitis, whereas 37 %, 81 %, and 100 % of patients with one, two, or all three factors, respectively, were diagnosed with complicated appendicitis. The emergency operation rate decreased from 83 % before to 58 % after adopting this scoring system, but no significant differences in postoperative complication rates and hospitalization periods were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The above-mentioned preoperative factors predictive of complicated appendicitis preoperatively are useful for emergency surgical decisions and reduce the burdens on surgeons and medical staff.

Retrospective Multicenter Study on Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infections after Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) are seen in up to 5% of patients after appendectomy for acute appendicitis. SSI are associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased costs. The aim of this multicenter study was to identify factors associated with SSI after appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between June 2014 and January 2015 in 6 teaching hospitals in the southwest of the Netherlands were included. Patient, diagnostic, intra-operative and disease-related factors were collected from the patients' charts. Primary outcome was surgical site infection. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors for SSI.

RESULTS

Some 637 patients were included. Forty-two patients developed a SSI. In univariable analysis body temperature >38°C, CRP>65 and complex appendicitis were associated with SSI. After multivariable logistic regression with stepwise backwards elimination, complex appendicitis was significantly associated with SSI (OR 4.09; 95% CI 2.04-8.20). Appendiceal stump closure with a stapler device was inversely correlated with SSI (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.97) Conclusions: Complex appendicitis is a risk factor for SSI and warrants close monitoring postoperatively. The use of a stapler device for appendiceal stump closure is associated with a reduced risk of SSI.

Towards an evidence-based management of right iliac fossa pain in the over 50-year-old patient

Introduction Right iliac fossa pain is a common presenting complaint to general surgery. The differential diagnosis is wide, particularly in the elderly. Computed tomography (CT) is often used in the 'older' population, as they have a higher prevalence of acute colonic diverticulitis and colonic neoplasia, both of which should be identified prior to surgery. There is, however, no published evidence to support this practice. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients aged over 50 years who presented with right iliac fossa (RIF) pain to a district general hospital. We determined whether tenderness was predominantly right- or left-sided and whether systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) was present on admission. The use of imaging modalities, their results and, if performed, operative findings were recorded. Results Of 3160 patients identified, 89 met the inclusion criteria. Diagnoses included appendicitis (27%), neoplasia (15%), non-specific abdominal pain (15%) and acute colonic diverticulitis (10%). CT was performed in 82% of patients, with a sensitivity of 97% based on operative findings. Six patients underwent surgery without a scan, two of whom required a change in the planned procedure due to unexpected findings. Conclusions Unless contraindicated, CT scanning should be mandatory in patients aged over 50 years presenting with signs of peritonism in the RIF or lower abdomen.

Severe Complications of Laparoscopic and Conventional Appendectomy Reported to the Finnish Patient Insurance Centre

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy is considered a safe operation, the related complications being minor. Negative exploration is an accepted procedure to avoid complications of appendicitis. Treatment with antibiotics is under debate as a primary treatment for appendicitis. The aim of this study was to collect and analyze detailed information on complications and morbidity related to appendectomy using the information of the nationwide Patient Insurance Association (PIA) database and to study the incidence of patient claims and compensated injuries related to appendectomy in Finland.

METHODS

Patients' claims from 1990 to 2010 were collected from the PIA register. Complications were classified using the accordion severity grading system. Severe complications were selected for more detailed analyses. Laparoscopic and open surgeries were compared. Factors related to compensated claims were assessed. For statistical analysis, Fisher's exact test, logistic multivariate regression, and the Mann-Kendall function were used.

RESULTS

Appendectomy complications leading to a patient insurance claim in Finland are rare (0.2 %). The rate of patients' claims after laparoscopic surgery was higher than after open surgery (p < 0.001), but the rate of compensated claims was equal. During the study period, complications after laparoscopic procedures more often led to additional surgery or organ failure (p = 0.03). Of the patients with a compensated injury, only 57 % had appendicitis. Preoperative computed tomography was used in only 6 % of these cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient injuries and claims regarding severe complications after appendectomy are rare. The complications related to laparoscopic appendectomy were more severe than those of open surgery.

Diabetes increases the risk of an appendectomy in patients with antibiotic treatment of noncomplicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

This retrospective cohort study examined whether diabetic patients have a higher risk for recurrent appendicitis during a 1-year follow-up period after successful antibiotic treatment for patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis than nondiabetic patients using a population-based database.

METHODS

We included 541 appendicitis patients who received antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis. We individually tracked each patient for a 1-year period to identify those who subsequently underwent an appendectomy during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

Cox proportional hazard regressions suggested that the adjusted hazard ratio of an appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period was 1.75 for appendicitis patients with diabetes than appendicitis patients without diabetes. We found that among females, the adjusted hazard ratio of an appendectomy was 2.18 for acute appendicitis patients with diabetes than their counterparts without diabetes. However, we failed to observe this relationship in males.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated a relationship between diabetes and a subsequent appendectomy in females who underwent antibiotic treatment for noncomplicated appendicitis.

Effect of surgical timing and outcomes for appendicitis severity

PURPOSE

This study was aimed to evaluate the effect of time of surgery for acute appendicitis on surgical outcomes to optimize the timing of appendectomies.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent an appendectomy were reviewed to obtain data on time of symptom onset, time of hospital presentation, and start times of surgery. Surgical findings were used to define appendicitis as either uncomplicated or complicated. The uncomplicated group included patients with simple, focal, or suppurative appendicitis, and the complicated group included patients with gangrenous, perforated appendicitis or periappendiceal abscess formation. The 2 groups were analyzed by age, sex, and time.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients were analyzed. The mean time from symptom onset to start of operation showed a significant difference between both groups (1,652.9 minutes vs. 3,383.8 minutes, P < 0.001). The mean time from hospital visit to start of operation showed no difference between both groups (398.7 minutes vs. 402.0 minutes, P = 0.895). Operating within 24 hours of symptom onset had a relative risk of 1.738 (95% confidence interval, 1.319-2.425) for complications. Operating more than 36 hours after symptom onset was associated with an increased risk of postoperative ileus and a longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Complicated appendicitis is associated with a delay in surgery from symptom onset rather than a delay at hospital arrival. Surgeons should take into account the time from symptom onset when deciding on the timing of appendectomy. We recommend that appendectomy be performed within 36 hours from symptom onset.

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.

Systematic review of clinical outcomes after prophylactic surgery

Introduction Prophylactic appendicectomy is performed prior to military, polar and space expeditions to prevent acute appendicitis in the field. However, the risk-benefit ratio of prophylactic surgery is controversial. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence for prophylactic appendicectomy. It is supplemented by a clinical example of prophylactic surgery resulting in life-threatening complications. Methods A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE(®) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Keyword variants of 'prophylaxis' and 'appendicectomy' were combined to identify potential papers for inclusion. Papers related to prophylactic appendicectomy risks and benefits were reviewed. Results Overall, 511 papers were identified, with 37 papers satisfying the inclusion criteria. Nine reported outcomes after incidental appendicectomy during concurrent surgical procedures. No papers focused explicitly on prophylactic appendicectomy in asymptomatic patients. The clinical example outlined acute obstruction secondary to adhesions from a prophylactic appendicectomy. Complications after elective appendicectomy versus the natural history of acute appendicitis in scenarios such as polar expeditions or covert operations suggest prophylactic appendicectomy may be appropriate prior to extreme situations. Nevertheless, the long-term risk of adhesion related complications render prophylactic appendicectomy feasible only when the short-term risk of acute appendicitis outweighs the long-term risks of surgery. Conclusions Prophylactic appendicectomy is rarely performed and not without risk. This is the first documented evidence of long-term complications following prophylactic appendicectomy. Surgery should be considered on an individual basis by balancing the risks of acute appendicitis in the field with the potential consequences of an otherwise unnecessary surgical procedure in a healthy patient.

Acute appendicitis with a neuroendocrine tumor G1 (carcinoid): pitfalls of conservative treatment

A man in his early thirties presented to our clinic with right lower abdominal pain. Computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) revealed a swollen appendix and an appendicolith. Abscess formation was not observed but ongoing appendiceal rupture was not ruled out. Three months after successful conservative therapy, the lumen of the apical portion was kept dilated and laparoscopic interval appendectomy was performed. No tumorous findings were observed macroscopically. However, histology revealed many tiny nests infiltrating the submucosa, muscular layer, and subserosa at the root of the appendix. An appendiceal neuroendocrine tumor G1 (NET G1; carcinoid) was diagnosed immunohistologically. Neither CT nor US visualized the tumor because of its non-tumor-forming but infiltrative growth. In conclusion, after successful conservative treatment, interval appendectomy should be considered to uncover a possible appendiceal NET G1 (carcinoid), particularly when dilatation of the distal lumen is kept under observation.

Appendectomy: Should it Be Performed So Quickly?

Controversy surrounds appendectomy timings and their effects on postoperative outcomes. This study evaluated the influence of hospital delays on perforation rates and complications in patients with acute appendicitis. From January 2008 to December 2013, the cases of 4148 consecutive patients who had undergone appendectomies for suspected appendicitis were reviewed. The patients' demographic data, times from symptom onset to hospital arrival (prehospital delay), times from hospital arrival to surgery (hospital delay), histological findings, and postoperative outcomes were documented. Perforation rates and complications were assessed at each time interval between symptom onset and surgery. Perforation rates and complications increased with longer prehospital delays, but no correlations were evident between hospital delays and perforation rates or between hospital delays and complications. Although delaying appendectomies for >18 hours had no statistically significant impact on perforation rates (25.3 vs 19.4%, P = 0.133), it caused more complications (8.7 vs 3.8%, P = 0.023) compared with cases delayed for 12 to 18 hours. Multivariate analyses determined that hospital delays were not associated with increased risks of perforation, complications, wound infections, or intra-abdominal abscesses. However, a >18-hour hospital delay was associated with a significantly increased risk of postoperative ileus (odds ratio = 2.94, 95% confidence interval = 1.17-7.41, P = 0.022). Hospital delays were not associated with significantly increased risks of perforation and complications. However, patients with perforated appendicitis had higher risks of developing postoperative ileus if hospital delays were >18 hours. Therefore, hospital delays of ≤18 hours are safe, but caution is required if delays are >18 hours.

Appendicitis during pregnancy in a Greenlandic Inuit woman; antibiotic treatment as a bridge-to-surgery in a remote area

Appendicitis during pregnancy causes severe diagnostic problems, and is associated with an increase in perforation rate and morbidity compared to that in the normal population. In addition, it may cause preterm birth and fetal loss. In remote areas, appendicitis during pregnancy, besides presenting diagnostic problems, also creates treatment difficulties. In Northern Greenland, geographical distances are vast, and weather conditions can be extreme. We report a case of a Greenlandic Inuit woman who presented with appendicitis during pregnancy. The nearest hospital with surgical and anaesthetic care was located nearly 1200 km away, and, due to extreme weather conditions, she could not be transferred immediately. She was treated with intravenous antibiotic treatment, and after weather conditions had improved, she was transferred by aeroplane and underwent appendicectomy. She recovered without complications. Our case suggests that appendicitis during pregnancy may be treated with antibiotics in remote areas until surgical treatment is available.

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.

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.

A history of the treatment of appendicitis in children: lessons learned

During the latter half of the 19th century, surgeons increasingly reported performing appendicectomies. Fitz from Harvard, Groves from Canada and Tait from Britain all recorded successful removal of the appendix. McBurney described the point of maximal tenderness in classic appendicitis and also the muscle-splitting incision centred on this point. Priority is given to McArthur in describing the lateral muscle-splitting incision. The direction of the cutaneous incision was later modified by Elliott and Lanz. Incisions that healed well were essential to recovery. Appendicectomy became a 'fashionable' operation after the London surgeon, Treves, removed the appendix of King Edward VII. Through the 20th century, the mortality from appendicitis fell notably with the advent of sulphonamide and penicillin, improvements in fluid therapy and safer anaesthesia. By 1990, diagnostic delay was the main cause of death. Semm performed the first laparoscopic appendicectomy in 1990, roundly criticized at the time for what is now a routine procedure. We view contemporary debates on the indications for appendicectomy, the best approach and how to optimize recovery in the light of the history of this intriguing disease.

Appendicitis in a deployed military setting: diagnosis, management and impact on the fighting force

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is a principal cause of abdominal pain worldwide and most common in young men who constitute the majority of the deployed fighting force. Diagnostic accuracy is paramount to prevent unnecessary intervention, morbidity and force impact.

METHOD

A consecutive series of appendicectomies, performed over 28 months on deployment in Afghanistan, was evaluated to assess the negative appendicectomy (NA) rate, explore the impact of CT on the rates of NA and assess the impact of appendicectomy on manpower in the deployed workforce.

RESULTS

In Afghanistan, the operative NA rate was 9.6%, whereas the histological NA rate was 20.5%. CT was widely used in Afghanistan (36%) and there was a significant reduction in NA rates if CT was performed preoperatively (6.25% vs 26%, p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic imaging will be limited in future conflicts and reliance on clinical judgement will be necessary. Military clinicians may need to accept higher rates of NA, as prolonged observation may not be possible. CT scanning should be used to a greater extent when available. A conservative management strategy for appendicitis with appropriate antibiotics should be considered in the event of delayed transfer to a surgical facility.

Meta-analysis of antibiotics versus appendicectomy for non-perforated acute appendicitis

Background

For more than a century, appendicectomy has been the treatment of choice for appendicitis. Recent trials have challenged this view. This study assessed the benefits and harms of antibiotic therapy compared with appendicectomy in patients with non‐perforated appendicitis.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted for randomized trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy in patients with non‐perforated appendicitis. Key outcomes were analysed using random‐effects meta‐analysis, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

Five studies including 1116 patients reported major complications in 25 (4·9 per cent) of 510 patients in the antibiotic and 41 (8·4 per cent) of 489 in the appendicectomy group: risk difference −2·6 (95 per cent c.i. –6·3 to 1·1) per cent (low‐quality evidence). Minor complications occurred in 11 (2·2 per cent) of 510 and 61 (12·5 per cent) of 489 patients respectively: risk difference −7·2 (−18·1 to 3·8) per cent (very low‐quality evidence). Of 550 patients in the antibiotic group, 47 underwent appendicectomy within 1 month: pooled estimate 8·2 (95 per cent c.i. 5·2 to 11·8) per cent (high‐quality evidence). Within 1 year, appendicitis recurred in 114 of 510 patients in the antibiotic group: pooled estimate 22·6 (15·6 to 30·4) per cent (high‐quality evidence). For every 100 patients with non‐perforated appendicitis, initial antibiotic therapy compared with prompt appendicectomy may result in 92 fewer patients receiving surgery within the first month, and 23 more experiencing recurrent appendicitis within the first year.

Conclusion

The choice of medical versus surgical management in patients with clearly uncomplicated appendicitis is value‐ and preference‐dependent, suggesting a change in practice towards shared decision‐making is necessary.

Limitations of each evolving

Treatment Modalities and Antimicrobial Stewardship Initiatives in the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infections

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) focus on improving the utilization of broad spectrum antibiotics to decrease the incidence of multidrug-resistant Gram positive and Gram negative pathogens. Hospital admission for both medical and surgical intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) commonly results in the empiric use of broad spectrum antibiotics such as fluoroquinolones, beta-lactam beta-lactamase inhibitors, and carbapenems that can select for resistant organisms. This review will discuss the management of uncomplicated and complicated IAIs as well as highlight stewardship initiatives focusing on the proper use of broad spectrum antibiotics.

Diagnostic value of procalcitonin for acute complicated appendicitis

A rapid and reliable test for detection of complicated appendicitis would be useful when deciding whether emergency surgery is required. We investigated the clinical usefulness of procalcitonin for identifying acute complicated appendicitis. We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients aged ≥15 years who underwent appendectomy without receiving antibiotics before admission and had preoperative data on the plasma procalcitonin level (PCT), body temperature (BT), white blood cell count (WBC), neutrophil / lymphocyte ratio (N/L ratio), and C-reactive protein level (CRP). Patients were classified into 3 groups: group A (inflammatory cell infiltration of the appendix with intact mural architecture), group B (inflammatory cell infiltration with destruction of mural architecture, but without abscess or perforation), and group C (macroscopic abscess and/or perforation). For identifying destruction of mural architecture, the diagnostic accuracy of PCT was similar to that of BT or CRP. However, the diagnostic accuracy of PCT was highest among the five inflammatory indices for identifying abscess and/or perforation, with the positive predictive value of PCT for abscess and/or perforation being higher than that of CRP (73% vs. 48%). Univariate analysis of the predictors of abscess and/or perforation revealed that a plasma PCT level ≥0.46 ng/mL had the highest odds ratio (30.3 [95% confidence interval: 6.5-140.5] versus PCT <0.46 ng/mL). These findings indicate that procalcitonin is a useful marker of acute appendicitis with abscess and/or perforation.

Trends in the Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Appendicitis

• On the basis of class B evidence and consensus, acute appendicitis in children can often be diagnosed clinically with only selective use of imaging. (13)(14)(15)(16) • On the basis of class B evidence and consensus, ultrasonography is the test of choice when acute appendicitis is suspected but is unclear based on history, physical examination, and laboratory results. (17)(18)(19) • On the basis of class B evidence and consensus, the use of computed tomography scan should be limited to cases of suspected complex appendicitis with abscess or when there is clinical suspicion for acute appendicitis but ultrasonography results are not helpful. (16) • On the basis of class C evidence and consensus, children with possible appendicitis ideally should be treated in medical centers that have skilled sonographic personnel. (21) • On the basis of class B evidence and consensus, simple appendicitis should be treated by appendectomy during normal operating hours. Preoperative treatment with intravenous antibiotics and fluids during the overnight hours halts disease progression and allows for the safest surgery with the benefit of a full and rested staff. (24)(25)(26) • On the basis of class B evidence and consensus, complex appendicitis with a well-defined abscess can be treated nonoperatively initially, with the option of an interval appendectomy after recovery from the acute infection. (29)(30) (31)(32)(33)

Acute appendicitis in pregnancy: literature review

INTRODUCTION

suspected appendicitis is the most common indication for surgery in non-obstetric conditions during pregnancy and occurs in about one in 500 to one in 635 pregnancies per year. This occurs more often in the second trimester of pregnancy. Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical problem encountered during pregnancy.

METHODS

a literature review on research of scientific articles, under the terms "acute appendicitis" and "pregnancy", in PubMed, Lilacs/SciELO, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Uptodate databases.

RESULTS

the clinical manifestations of appendicitis are similar to non-pregnant women, however, without a classic presentation, which often occurs, diagnosis is difficult and must be supported by imaging.

DISCUSSION

clinical diagnosis should be strongly suspected in pregnant women with classic findings such as abdominal pain that migrates to the right lower quadrant. The main purpose of imaging is to reduce delays in surgical intervention due to diagnostic uncertainty. A secondary objective is to reduce, but not eliminate, the negative appendectomy rate. Differential diagnosis of suspected acute appendicitis usually includes pathologies considered in non-pregnant people.

CONCLUSION

the imaging study of choice is ultrasound, MRI may be used when the former is not conclusive and, as a last resort, a CT scan can be performed. The treatment remains appendectomy by laparotomy, since the feasibility of video- assisted surgery in these cases remains controversial.

Aripiprazole for Tourette's syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole (ARI) for Tourette's syndrome (TS).

METHODS

This review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of children and adolescents (6-18 years) with TS comparing ARI monotherapy with another monotherapies in relation to clinical improvement and adverse events.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with a total of 528 subjects (ARI treatment group: n = 253; control group: n = 275) met the inclusion criteria. These included two RCTs (n = 255) that compared ARI monotherapy with tiapride (TIA). Tic symptoms control assessed by Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (Standard Mean Difference (SMD) = -0.38 (Confidence Interval (CI) = -1.32 to 0.56); I(2) = 90%, P = 0.42) revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly different when ARI (1.5%) was compared with haloperidol (HAL) (43.5%). No significant group differences were found in the rates of nausea/vomiting, dizziness, and dry mouth between ARI and TIA (RR = 0.57 to 1.00 (95%CI = 0.14-4.20); I(2) = 0% to 69%, P = 0.35 to 1.00).

CONCLUSION

This review found that ARI has similar efficacy to TIA and HAL for TS, while extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly less with ARI than with HAL. ARI can be considered as an alternative treatment option for TS.

Acute appendicitis: proposal of a new comprehensive grading system based on clinical, imaging and laparoscopic findings

Advances in the technology and improved access to imaging modalities such as Computed Tomography and laparoscopy have changed the contemporary diagnostic and management of acute appendicitis. Complicated appendicitis (phlegmon, abscess and/ or diffuse peritonitis), is now reliably distinguished from uncomplicated cases. Therefore, a new comprehensive grading system for acute appendicitis is necessary. The goal is review and update the laparoscopic grading system of acute appendicitis and to provide a new standardized classification system to allow more uniform patient stratification. During the last World Society of Emergency Surgery Congress in Israel (July, 2015), a panel involving Acute Appendicitis Experts and the author’s discussed many current aspects about the acute appendicitis between then, it will be submitted a new comprehensive disease grading system. It was idealized based on three aspect of the disease (clinical and imaging presentation and laparoscopic findings). The new grading system may provide a standardized system to allow more uniform patient stratification for appendicitis research. In addition, may aid in determining optimal management according to grade. Lastly, what we want is to draw a multicenter observational study within the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) based on this design.

Patient perspectives on antibiotics for appendicitis at one hospital

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis has long been considered a progressive inflammatory condition best treated by prompt appendectomy. Recently, several trials comparing initial treatment with antibiotics alone to appendectomy suggest that antibiotic therapy may be a safe option in select patients. However, little is known about patients' understanding of appendicitis, prioritized outcomes, and treatment preferences.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, observational survey at a Los Angeles County public hospital emergency department. Trained study coordinators recorded the following data on each subject: basic knowledge of appendicitis, past surgical and antibiotic history, and medical illness outcome priorities. Participants were then educated about appendicitis and were told that studies had demonstrated that appendicitis can be treated safely with antibiotics alone. Subjects were then surveyed as to their preference for urgent surgery or antibiotics alone in a hypothetical scenario of acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

RESULTS

Of 129 subjects interviewed, 56 (43%) correctly defined appendicitis, and 69 (53%) identified the treatment for appendicitis as surgery. When presented with a hypothetical acute appendicitis scenario, 57% chose antibiotics over surgery. Persons with previous appendectomy and parents of minors more often chose antibiotics alone, 74% and 63%, respectively. Dying was the most frequently cited and highest-ranked concern about medical illness.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that, among persons at one US public hospital, understanding of appendicitis is poor. Once presented with background information about appendicitis and being informed that antibiotics can safely treat appendicitis, many people would prefer an antibiotic approach over appendectomy. Death is the most prioritized concern.

Antibiotics alone versus appendectomy to treat uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults: what do meta-analyses say?

Background

Primary appendectomy is the current standard of care for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis, but interest in conservative treatment with antibiotics alone has been increasing in recent years. Clinical trials so far have shown controversial results.

Methods

A series of meta-analyses were reviewed. Studies comparing surgery versus antibiotics alone for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults were included. Descriptive statistics and data on treatment effects were retrieved and summarized.

Results

The conservative approach has a success rate of around 60 % and is associated with shorter pain duration, reduced analgesic medication, faster resolution of the inflammation process, lower expenses and quicker return to work. On the other hand, medical treatment leads to high (up to 20 %) readmission rates and more often requires surgery. An operative approach is associated with higher treatment success rates (>90 %) and very a low mortality rate.

Conclusion

Based on the current body of evidence, the use of antibiotics for primary treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis cannot be routinely recommended. Appendectomy remains the gold-standard treatment.

High serum cancer antigen 125 level indicates perforation in acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of acute appendicitis is sometimes challenging, and prompt evaluation is required because of the risk of complications if not treated appropriately.

AIM

We aimed to evaluate whether cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) has diagnositic accuracy and predictor of the severity in acute appendicitis.

RESULTS

Sixty patients with acute appendicitis were recruited prospectively in this study between May 2014 and March 2015. Blood samples were obtained to measure CA-125 levels before appendectomy. Of the 57 patients, 10 had perforated or gangrenous appendicitis intraoperatively. The CA-125 levels were significantly higher in patients with perforated or gangrenous appendicitis than patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (49.9 vs 10.5 U/mL, P=.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer antigen 125 levels in patients with highly suspected or confirmed appendicitis could help clinicians determine the severity of the disease.

Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies worldwide. The cause remains poorly understood, with few advances in the past few decades. To obtain a confident preoperative diagnosis is still a challenge, since the possibility of appendicitis must be entertained in any patient presenting with an acute abdomen. Although biomarkers and imaging are valuable adjuncts to history and examination, their limitations mean that clinical assessment is still the mainstay of diagnosis. A clinical classification is used to stratify management based on simple (non-perforated) and complex (gangrenous or perforated) inflammation, although many patients remain with an equivocal diagnosis, which is one of the most challenging dilemmas. An observed divide in disease course suggests that some cases of simple appendicitis might be self-limiting or respond to antibiotics alone, whereas another type often seems to perforate before the patient reaches hospital. Although the mortality rate is low, postoperative complications are common in complex disease. We discuss existing knowledge in pathogenesis, modern diagnosis, and evolving strategies in management that are leading to stratified care for patients.

[Uncomplicated acute appendicitis: is there a place for conservative treatment]

Le but de cette étude a été d’évaluer l'efficacité de l'antibiothérapie seule dans le traitement des appendicites aigues non compliquées. C'est une étude prospective, intéressant 68 patients ayant eu une appendicite aigue simple, de confirmation radiologique, traités par l'amoxicilline associée à l'acide clavulanique pendant 10 jours. L'appendicectomie a été réalisée en cas d'aggravation ou en cas de non amélioration au bout de 48heures de traitement. Le traitement conservateur a été efficace dans 82,35% avec une résolution complète des symptômes chez 56 patients. Les 12 cas restants (17,65%) ont subit une appendicectomie. l'appendicite a été gangréneuse dans 8 cas et phlegmoneuse dans 4 cas. Cinq des 56 patients, qui ont bien évolué sous traitement conservateur, ont été réadmis et opérés pour récidive, soit 8,9%. Deux cas ont eu une appendicite compliquée. L'appendicectomie reste le traitement de référence pour l'appendicite aigue, mais le traitement antibiotique peut être proposé en première intension à des patients présentant une appendicite aigue non compliquée.

Changing roles of computed tomography in diagnosing acute appendicitis in emergency rooms

BACKGROUND

We used the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database for analysis and statistics to investigate the role of computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing acute appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All 10 046 patients with acute appendicitis were selected and categorized into two groups based on those who did and did not receive CT 3 days before acute appendicitis diagnosis: non-CT and CT groups. A noteworthy outcome was the incidence of peritonitis within 90 days after diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

RESULTS

The rate of using CT for patients with acute appendicitis increased considerably from 7.9% to 52.9% from 2000 to 2010. The peritonitis incidence rates were 3.54% and 10.7% in the non-CT and CT groups, respectively. Patients who received CT on the same day exhibited a 3.8-fold higher risk of peritonitis than did those in the non-CT group. Those who underwent CT before diagnosis of acute appendicitis exhibited no significant difference of peritonitis risk when compared with those in the non-CT group. The CT group patients were hospitalized 2.19 days longer than the non-CT group patients. Patients who received CT before and on the same day were hospitalized 1.31 and 2.43 days longer than those who did not undergo CT.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent CT exhibited higher risks of peritonitis and longer hospital stays compared with those who did not. Moreover, patients who received CT on the same day of operation exhibited a higher risk of peritonitis than those who underwent CT 1 or 2 days before operation.