Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Progress in the application of machine learning in CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis represents a prevalent condition within the spectrum of acute abdominal pathologies, exhibiting a diverse clinical presentation. Computed tomography (CT) imaging has emerged as a prospective diagnostic modality for the identification and differentiation of appendicitis. This review aims to synthesize current applications, progress, and challenges in integrating machine learning (ML) with CT for diagnosing acute appendicitis while exploring prospects. ML-driven advancements include automated detection, differential diagnosis, and severity stratification. For instance, deep learning models such as AppendiXNet achieved an AUC of 0.81 for appendicitis detection, while 3D convolutional neural networks (CNNs) demonstrated superior performance, with AUCs up to 0.95 and an accuracy of 91.5%. ML algorithms effectively differentiate appendicitis from similar conditions like diverticulitis, achieving AUCs between 0.951 and 0.972. They demonstrate remarkable proficiency in distinguishing between complex and straightforward cases through the innovative use of radiomics and hybrid models, achieving AUCs ranging from 0.80 to 0.96. Even with these advancements, challenges remain, such as the "black-box" nature of artificial intelligence, its integration into clinical workflows, and the significant resources required. Future directions emphasize interpretable models, multimodal data fusion, and cost-effective decision-support systems. By addressing these barriers, ML holds promise for refining diagnostic precision, optimizing treatment pathways, and reducing healthcare costs.

Swedish national guidelines for diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Differences in the management of this large group of patients has important consequences for the patients and the healthcare system. Controversies regarding the understanding of the natural course of the disease, the utility of new diagnostic methods, and alternative treatments have lead to large variations in practice patterns between centres. These national guidelines present evidence-based recommendations aiming at a uniform, safe and cost-efficient management of this large group of patients.

METHOD

A working group of six experts with broad clinical and research experience was formed. Additional expertise from outside was consulted during the process. A national survey revealed significant variations in the management of patients with suspicion of appendicitis. The evidence provided in published guidelines and reviews were extracted and systematically graded, according to the GRADE methodology. This was supplemented by additional more recent and more directed search of the literature. Patients treated for appendicitis were involved through interviews. The guidelines were reviewed by external experts before the final version was determined.

RESULTS

The guidelines cover an extensive number of issues: pathology, epidemiology, aetiology, natural history, clinical and laboratory diagnosis, diagnostic scoring systems, diagnostic imaging, treatment, nursing care, follow-up, quality registers and quality indicators, among others. Special considerations related to children and pregnant women are covered.

CONCLUSION

These national guidelines present an extensive and thorough review of the current knowledge base related to appendicitis, and provide up-to-date evidence-based recommendations for the management of this large group of patients.

Diagnostic value of the appendicitis inflammatory response (AIR) score. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical scoring algorithms are cost efficient in patients with suspicion of acute appendicitis. This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic properties of the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score compared with the Alvarado score.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were searched for reports on the diagnostic properties of the AIR score from 2008 to July 18, 2024. A meta-analysis of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area and the sensitivity and specificity for all and advanced appendicitis patients was performed. Advanced appendicitis was defined as perforated or gangrenous appendicitis or appendicitis abscess or phlegmon or if described as complicated appendicitis. The risk of bias was estimated via the QUADAS-2 tool. The ROC areas of the AIR score and the Alvarado score were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 26 reports with a total of 15.699 patients were included. The area under the ROC curve for the AIR score was 0.86 (95% CI 0.83-0.88) for all patients with appendicitis and 0.93 (CI 0.91-0.96) for those with advanced appendicitis, which was greater than the corresponding areas for the Alvarado score (0.79, CI 0.76; 0.81) and 0.88, CI 0.82; 0.95), respectively. At > 4 points, the sensitivity was 0.91 (CI 0.88; 0.94) for all patients with appendicitis and 0.95 (CI 0.94; 0.97) for those with advanced appendicitis. At > 3 points, the sensitivity was 0.95 (0.90; 0.97) for all patients with appendicitis and 0.99 (0.97; 0.99) for those with advanced appendicitis. At > 8 points, the specificity was 0.98 (0.97; 0.99) for all patients with appendicitis and 0.99 (0.97; 0.99) for those with advanced appendicitis. The included studies had a low risk for bias and low heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

The AIR score has a better diagnostic capacity than the Alvarado score does. The AIR score is a safe and efficient basis for risk-stratified management of patients suspected of having appendicitis.

Time to improve the management of patients with suspected acute appendicitis: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Preoperative imaging is now recommended in patients with suspected acute appendicitis (AA) by the World Society of Emergency Surgery. Our aims were (i) to describe our local practice and (ii) to evaluate the efficiency of performing ultrasound (US) and/or computed tomography (CT) by assessing management failure, specificity and sensitivity, and length of stay in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included all patients who underwent US or CT for the management of suspected AA. Patients were included if they were admitted to the ED in February or June between 2012 and 2021.

RESULTS

The study included 339 patients. US was performed in 278 patients (82%), of whom 91 also had a second-line CT (31.3%). There was a significant increase in the rate of CT over the inclusion period. Three percent (3%) of the patients had management failure and a higher age and CT or US + CT were significantly associated with the risk of management failure. Length of stay in the ED increased significantly when a second-line CT was performed. The sensitivity and specificity of US were 84.8% and 93.2%, respectively. Sensitivity was significantly different from CT (100%, p = 0.03) but not specificity (87.9%, p = 0.29). Both US and CT results were more likely to be considered for further management if positive. The vast majority of patients with negative or inconclusive results were admitted in surgical wards or underwent a second-line examination.

CONCLUSION

If available in the hospital together with CT, US should probably be performed systematically and as a first-line examination in patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

Predictors of appendicectomy one year after antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis: Insights from a prospective, multicentre, observational study

BACKGROUND

Surgeons are sometimes reluctant to manage uncomplicated appendicitis non-operatively. Reasons cited include the risk of recurrent appendicitis and the risk of missed appendiceal malignancy. The aim of this study was to address these uncertainties and determine the long-term efficacy of antibiotic versus operative management of appendicitis.

METHOD

One-year follow-up of patients enrolled in the multicentre, COVID:HAREM cohort study during March-June 2020 was performed. Initial operative or non-operative management was determined on a case-by-case basis by the responsible surgeon. Outcomes were appendicectomy rate at 1-year, histology of removed appendix and predictors of unsuccessful antibiotic treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 625 patients who had non-operative management were included. Emergency appendicectomy had been performed by 1-year in 24% (149/625), with a median time to appendicectomy of 12 days [IQR 1-77] from presentation. Thirty-one patients had elective appendicectomy. Normal histology was reported in 6% of emergency procedures and 58% of elective ones. There were 7 malignancies and 3 neuroendocrine tumors identified at histology. All patients with malignant histology had ≥1 risk factors for malignancy at initial presentation. Faecolithiasis (hazard ratios (HR) 2.3, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.51-3.49) and a high Adult Appendicitis Score (AAS >16; HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.52-3.92) were independent risk factors for unsuccessful non-operative management.

CONCLUSION

At 1 year, 71% of patients managed non-operatively did not undergo an appendicectomy. Recurrence of appendicitis was associated with faecolithiasis and a high AAS. Patients at higher risk for appendiceal malignancy should have targeted follow-up. These factors should be considered when counseling patients on non-operative management.

Acute Appendicitis Management in Patients Aged Above 40 Years During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Study With Four Years of Follow-Up

Background The COVID-19 pandemic led many units to increase their utilization of nonoperative management (NOM) of acute appendicitis, with the literature showing its non-inferiority when compared to operative management (OM). Therefore, we compared NOM to OM against standard guidelines in order to ascertain the effectiveness of NOM. Primary outcomes were rates of admission, complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), and the incidence of colonic malignancy following NOM upon subsequent bowel evaluation using colonoscopy and/or computed tomography (CT) scan. Methods This was a retrospective observational study done on patients who were admitted with acute appendicitis from January 2020 to January 2022 at Wirral University Teaching Hospital, UK. Data was electronically collected from medical records. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 40 years and above, admitted with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis using a CT scan, and who underwent either OM or NOM. Exclusion criteria were patients below 40 years old or not diagnosed with acute appendicitis. Results This study included 211 cases of acute appendicitis (female to male: 110:101), with a median age of 60. One hundred and twenty-five (60%) patients were managed operatively, while 86 cases (40%) were managed by NOM. All of the cases were diagnosed using a CT scan. The mean LOS for operative and non-operative cases were 4.77 and 4.89 days, respectively. When readmission days were added over the following three years, adjusted LOS was 5.35 days for operative cases, in comparison to 10.86 days for NOM. Forty-five percent of NOM cases had at least one episode of readmission, with 37% of them being in the first year. We found six cases of malignancy in the NOM cohort, none of which were detected on colonoscopy following discharge. Conclusion NOM is associated with increased LOS and increased readmission rates, and 44% of cases eventually required appendicectomy.

Is pelvic ultrasound useful in the clinical assessment and management of women with right iliac fossa pain? A single-centre retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain is a common presenting symptom in surgical patients, with a wide range of differentials, particularly in premenopausal females. This study explores ultrasound usage in the management of women aged 16-55 years presenting with RIF pain.

METHODS

A total of 1,082 patients who presented to a tertiary hospital over 12 months were included. Data were collected from patients' electronic records, including initial clinical impression, imaging, management, operative findings, histology and subsequent hospital attendances within 6 weeks and within 6 months.

RESULTS

Following clinical assessment, 607 (56%) of patients underwent an ultrasound. Of these, 280 (25.9%) patients received no radiological imaging on initial presentation, and 252 (42%) had pathology identified on ultrasound. The most common finding was an ovarian cyst, closely followed by unexplained free pelvic fluid. Of the 607 patients scanned, 29 (4.8%) had an ultrasound diagnosis of appendicitis; 254 of 1,082 (23.5%) patients underwent operative management. Of the 254 patients who had surgery, 179 (70.5%) had preoperative imaging. Of the 29 (11.4%) cases where the intraoperative finding was gynaecological, 15 (51.7%) cases had not had any preoperative imaging. The negative appendicectomy rate was 21.3% (45/211). Of the 45 patients who had a histologically normal appendix, 22 (48.9%) had not had any previous imaging. Ultrasound had a specificity of 78% for diagnosing appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent operative management, a negative finding or finding not requiring surgical management was associated with no preoperative imaging. This supports the use of ultrasound scans as an adjunct in a multimodal approach to the assessment of women presenting with RIF pain.

Light gradient boost tree classifier predictions on appendicitis with periodontal disease from biochemical and clinical parameters

INTRODUCTION

Untreated periodontitis significantly increases the risk of tooth loss, often delaying treatment due to asymptomatic phases. Recent studies have increasingly associated poor dental health with conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, obesity, pneumonia, cardiovascular disease, and renal illness. Despite these connections, limited research has investigated the relationship between appendicitis and periodontal disease. This study aims to predict appendicitis in patients with periodontal disease using biochemical and clinical parameters through the application of a light gradient boost tree classifier.

METHODS

Data from 125 patient records at Saveetha Institute of Dental College and Medical College were pre-processed and analyzed. We utilized data preprocessing techniques, feature selection methods, and model development approaches to estimate the risk of appendicitis in patients with periodontitis. Both Random Forest and Light Gradient Boosting algorithms were evaluated for accuracy using confusion matrices to assess their predictive performance.

RESULTS

The Random Forest model achieved an accuracy of 94%, demonstrating robust predictive capability in this context. In contrast, the Light Gradient Boost algorithms achieved a significantly higher accuracy of 98%, underscoring their superior predictive efficiency. This substantial difference highlights the importance of algorithm selection and optimization in developing reliable predictive models. The higher accuracy of Light Gradient Boost algorithms suggests effective minimization of prediction errors and improved differentiation between appendicitis with periodontitis and healthy states. Our study identifies age, white blood cell count, and symptom duration as pivotal predictors for detecting concurrent periodontitis in acute appendicitis cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed prediction model introduces a novel and promising approach, providing valuable insights into distinguishing between periodontitis and acute appendicitis. These findings highlight the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and support informed clinical decision-making in patients presenting with both conditions, offering new avenues for optimizing patient care strategies.

Nationwide prospective audit for the evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults: right iliac fossa treatment (RIFT)-Turkey

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most prevalent surgical emergency. The negative appendicectomy rate and diagnostic uncertainty are important concerns. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of current appendicitis risk prediction models in patients with acute right iliac fossa pain.

METHODS

A nationwide prospective observational study was conducted, including all consecutive adult patients who presented with right iliac fossa pain. Diagnostic, clinical and negative appendicectomy rate data were recorded. The Alvarado score, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR), Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and Adult Appendicitis Score systems were calculated with collected data to classify patients into risk categories. Diagnostic value and categorization performance were evaluated, with use of risk category-based metrics including 'true positive rate' (percentage of appendicitis patients in the highest risk category), 'failure rate' (percentage of patients with appendicitis in the lowest risk category) and 'categorization resolution' (true positive rate/failure rate).

RESULTS

A total of 3358 patients from 84 centres were included. Female patients were less likely to undergo surgery than men (71.5% versus 82.5% respectively; relative risk 0.866, 95% c.i. 0.834 to 0.901, P < 0.001); with a three-fold higher negative appendicectomy rate (11.3% versus 4.1% respectively; relative risk 2.744, 95% c.i. 2.047 to 3.677, P < 0.001). Ultrasonography was utilized in 56.8% and computed tomography in 75.2% of all patients. The Adult Appendicitis Score had the best diagnostic performance for the whole population; however, only RIPASA was significant in men. All scoring systems were successful in females patients, but Adult Appendicitis Score had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value. The RIPASA and the Adult Appendicitis Score had the best categorization resolution values, complemented by their exceedingly low failure rates in both male and female patients. Alvarado and AIR had extremely high failure rates in men.

CONCLUSION

The negative appendicectomy rate was low overall, but women had an almost three-fold higher negative appendicectomy rate despite lower likelihood to undergo surgery. The overuse of imaging tests, best exemplified by the 75.2% frequency of patients undergoing computed tomography, may lead to increased costs. Risk-scoring systems such as RIPASA and Adult Appendicitis Score appear to be superior to Alvarado and AIR.

Multicenter validation of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based platform for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The current scores used to help diagnose acute appendicitis have a "gray" zone in which the diagnosis is usually inconclusive. Furthermore, the universal use of CT scanning is limited because of the radiation hazards and/or limited resources. Hence, it is imperative to have an accurate diagnostic tool to avoid unnecessary, negative appendectomies.

METHODS

This was an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study. The diagnostic accuracy of the artificial intelligence platform was assessed by sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, the area under the receiver curve, precision curve, F1 score, and Matthews correlation coefficient. Moreover, calibration curve, decision curve analysis, and clinical impact curve analysis were used to assess the clinical utility of the artificial intelligence platform. The accuracy of the artificial intelligence platform was also compared to that of CT scanning.

RESULTS

Two data sets were used to assess the artificial intelligence platform: a multicenter real data set (n = 2,579) and a well-qualified synthetic data set (n = 9736). The platform showed a sensitivity of 92.2%, specificity of 97.2%, and negative predictive value of 98.7%. The artificial intelligence had good area under the receiver curve, precision, F1 score, and Matthews correlation coefficient (0.97, 86.7, 0.89, 0.88, respectively). Compared to CT scanning, the artificial intelligence platform had a better area under the receiver curve (0.92 vs 0.76), specificity (90.9 vs 53.3), precision (99.8 vs 98.9), and Matthews correlation coefficient (0.77 vs 0.72), comparable sensitivity (99.2 vs 100), and lower negative predictive value (67.6 vs 99.5). Decision curve analysis and clinical impact curve analysis intuitively revealed that the platform had a substantial net benefit within a realistic probability range from 6% to 96%.

CONCLUSION

The current artificial intelligence platform had excellent sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy exceeding 90% and may help clinicians in decision making on patients with suspected acute appendicitis, particularly when access to CT scanning is limited.

Risk Factors Associated With Negative Appendicectomy Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common emergency general surgical condition worldwide. Diagnosis is challenging and incorporates clinical, biochemical and radiological investigations. Our aim was to provide data from routine practice investigating widely utilised diagnostic methods from a single centre within the United Kingdom.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients who underwent a laparoscopic appendicectomy for AA between April 2022 and March 2023. AA was defined as the presence of transmural polymorphonuclear leukocytes in histology. Subgroup analysis was performed on paediatric patients. Factors associated with AA were investigated, and the diagnostic utility of biochemical and radiological investigations was examined.

RESULTS

A total of 330 appendicectomies were analysed. We found an overall negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) of 38% and 48% in paediatric patients. Independent factors associated with AA on the multivariate analysis included elevated neutrophil counts (>7 × 109/L) (OR 4.04), elevated CRP (>5 mg/L) (OR 3.04) and a radiological diagnosis (OR 8.0). Computerised tomography (CT) and ultrasound had sensitivity/specificity of 98%/47% and 35%/86%, respectively. The positive-predictive values were 85% for CT and 50% for ultrasound, and the negative-predictive values were 86% for CT and 77% for ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

Our study has highlighted the importance of utilising a combination of factors to improve the diagnostic certainty of AA. However, our routine practice data have shown different sensitivities and specificities of imaging in comparison to existing literature, resulting in a high NAR. Further real-world data are needed to understand whether these differences from the existing data are seen in other clinical settings.

Observation Safely Reduces the Use of the Computerized Tomography in Medium-to-Low-Risk Patients with Suspected Acute Appendicitis: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives-The objective was to compare the effectiveness of observation in standard-of-care computed tomography (CT) in adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis (AA). Methods-Patients with clinically suspected AA and inconclusive diagnosis after primary clinical examination, laboratory examination, and transabdominal ultrasound (TUS) were eligible for the study, and they were randomized (1:1) to parallel groups: observation-group patients were observed for 8-12 h and then, repeated clinical and laboratory examinations and TUS were performed; CT group (control group) patients underwent abdominopelvic CT scan. The study utilized Statistical Analysis System 9.2 for data analysis, including tests, logistic regression, ROC analysis, and significance evaluation. Patients were enrolled in the study at Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos in Lithuania between December 2018 and June 2021. Results-A total of 160 patients (59 men, 101 women), with a mean age of 33.7 ± 14.71, were included, with 80 patients in each group. Observation resulted in a reduced likelihood of a CT scan compared with the CT group (36.3% vs. 100% p < 0.05). One diagnostic laparoscopy was performed in the observation group; there were no cases of negative appendectomy (NA) in the CT group. Both conditional CT and observation pathways resulted in high sensitivity and specificity (97.7% and 94.6% vs. 96.7% and 95.8%). Conclusions-Observation including the repeated evaluation of laboratory results and TUS significantly reduces the number of CT scans without increasing NA numbers or the number of complicated cases.

Factors associated with early inhospital adverse outcome following surgery for acute appendicitis in Uganda: a multicenter cohort

INTRODUCTION

Surgery for acute appendicitis has been associated with significant morbidity. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with early inhospital adverse outcomes following surgery for acute appendicitis in Uganda.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, prospective cohort in which early inhospital outcome following surgery for acute appendicitis was assessed at 4 regional referral hospitals in Uganda. The occurrence of complications during the admission period was documented as well as the length of hospital stay. Factors associated with adverse outcomes were determined using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Of the 102 patients who underwent surgery for acute appendicitis, the majority were males 79(77.5%) with a mean age of 23.8(SD = 12.5) years. The perforated appendix was seen in 26 (25.5%) patients. Post-operative complications occurred in 21(20.6%) with the commonest being surgical site infection in 19(18.6%) patients. The median length of hospital stay was 3(IQR = 3-4) days with 43(42.2%) staying in hospital for more than 3 days. The presence of anemia (Hb < 8) (aRR = 1.376, CI = 1.159-1.634, P =  < 0.001) and having a perforated appendix (aRR = 1.263, CI = 1.026-1.555, P = 0.027) were independently associated with occurrence of complications while being HIV positive (aRR = 1.379, CI = 1.105-1.721, P = 0.005) and having a perforated appendix (aRR = 1.258, CI = 1.019-1.554, P = 0.033) were independently associated with prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Community education about early presentation is still required in order to reduce the number of patients that present late which should, in turn, reduce the risk of complications and length of hospital stay.

Usefulness of extended inflammatory parameters related to neutrophil activation reported by Sysmex XN-1000 hematology analyzer for predicting complicated acute appendicitis. Comparison with canonical inflammatory laboratory tests

AIM

Accurate diagnosis of complicated appendicitis is of importance to ensure that patients receive early and effective treatment, minimizing the risk of postoperative complications to promote successful recovery. Biochemical markers are a promising tool to identify complicated appendicitis. We aimed to evaluate the potential role of novel parameters related with neutrophil activation, known as "Extended Inflammation Parameters" (EIP), included in blood cell count reported by Sysmex XN-Series analyzers, compared to other canonical biomarkers in identifying complicated appendicitis.

METHOD

Prospective observational study including patients with confirmed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, cell blood count, including white blood cell (WBC), absolute neutrophil (ANC) and immature granulocyte (IG) count and EIP (neutrophil reactivity [NEUT-RI] and granularity intensity [NEUT-GI]) were analyzed before surgery. Their accuracy to diagnose complicated appendicitis was tested in an ROC curve analysis.

RESULTS

Our population study included 119 patients, and appendicitis was complicated in 58 (48.7%). NLR, CRP and procalcitonin levels, ANC and IG count and NEUT-RI and NEUT-GI were higher in patients with complicated appendicitis. Regarding accuracy for complicated appendicitis, CRP was the biomarker with the highest performance (ROC AUC: 0.829), with an optimal cutoff of 73.1 mg/L (sensitivity: 63.8%, specificity: 88.5%). NEUT-RI and NEUT-GI achieved both significant but poor accuracy, with ROC AUC of 0.606 and 0.637, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel laboratory tests reported by Sysmex XN-Series analyzers have poor accuracy for identifying complicated appendicitis. In this study, CRP was the biomarker with the highest performance and may be useful as predictor of the severity of acute appendicitis.

Combination of clinical information and radiomics models for the differentiation of acute simple appendicitis and non simple appendicitis on CT images

To investigate the radiomics models for the differentiation of simple and non-simple acute appendicitis. This study retrospectively included 334 appendectomy cases (76 simple and 258 non-simple cases) for acute appendicitis. These cases were divided into training (n = 106) and test cohorts (n = 228). A radiomics model was developed using the radiomic features of the appendix area on CT images as the input variables. A CT model was developed using the clinical and CT features as the input variables. A combined model was developed by combining the radiomics model and clinical information. These models were tested, and their performance was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curves and decision curve analysis (DCA). The variables independently associated with non-simple appendicitis in the combined model were body temperature, age, percentage of neutrophils and Rad-score. The AUC of the combined model was significantly higher than that of the CT model (P = 0.041). The AUC of the radiomics model was also higher than that of the CT model but did not reach a level of statistical significance (P = 0.053). DCA showed that all three models had a higher net benefit (NB) than the default strategies, and the combined model presented the highest NB. A nomogram of the combined model was developed as the graphical representation of the final model. It is feasible to use the combined information of clinical and CT radiomics models for the differentiation of simple and non-simple acute appendicitis.

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy versus appendectomy or antibiotics in the modern approach to uncomplicated acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy has been proposed as an alternative strategy for treating appendicitis, but debate exists on its role compared with conventional treatment.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. The last search was in April of 2023. The risk ratio with a 95% confidence interval was calculated for dichotomous variables, and the mean difference with a 95% confidence interval for continuous variables. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool (randomized controlled trials) and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Intervention tool (non-randomized controlled trials).

RESULTS

Six studies met the eligibility criteria. Four studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 236 patients) and appendectomy (n = 339) and found no differences in technical success during index admission (risk ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.92,1.02]). Appendectomy showed superior outcomes for recurrence at 1-year follow-up (risk ratio 11.28, 95% confidence interval [2.61,48.73]). Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy required shorter procedural time (mean difference -14.38, 95% confidence interval [-20.17, -8.59]) and length of hospital stay (mean difference -1.19, 95% confidence interval [-2.37, -0.01]), with lower post-intervention abdominal pain (risk ratio 0.21, 95% confidence interval [0.14,0.32]). Two studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 269) and antibiotic treatment (n = 280). Technical success during admission (risk ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval [0.91,1.35]) and appendicitis recurrence (risk ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval [0.08,14.87]) did not differ, but endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy decreased the length of hospitalization (mean difference -1.91, 95% confidence interval [-3.18, -0.64]).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis did not identify significant differences between endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy and appendectomy or antibiotics regarding technical success during index admission and treatment efficacy at 1-year follow-up. However, a high risk of imprecision limits these results. The advantages of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy in terms of reduced procedural times and shorter lengths of stay must be balanced against the increased risk of having an appendicitis recurrence at one year.

Are Antibiotics the New Appendectomy?

Prior to the development of laparoscopic procedures, open appendectomy was the standard of care for the majority of appendicitis cases. Recently, studies have debated using antibiotics as a first-line treatment in uncomplicated appendicitis cases. The definition of uncomplicated appendicitis is not always clear-cut; however, with the large-scale accessibility of radiologic techniques, it is becoming increasingly easier to classify patient groups. As suggested by clinical and radiological patient data, this has raised the speculation of considering antibiotic therapy as the sole treatment modality in uncomplicated appendicitis cases. We aim to compare the options of surgery and antibiotics only in terms of efficacy, complications, and financial cost. A range of databases and search strategies were adopted, and various databases were used, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and JAMA. Collectively, 30 studies were reviewed, but only 18 were included. Efficacy rates were higher in the appendectomy group. Nevertheless, the antibiotics-only group maintained an efficacy rate greater than 70% at one-year follow-up. Risk factors that decreased the efficacy in medical management included the presence of appendicolith, neoplasm, appendiceal dilatation, peri-appendiceal fluid collection, higher mean temperature, CRP, and bilirubin. Complications were more frequent and significant in the surgery group. These included complications related to anaesthesia, surgical site infections, damage to nearby structures, and pulmonary embolism. Despite several years of follow-up and disease recurrences, higher financial costs were observed in surgically treated patients compared to the antibiotics-only group. Given the high success rates post-appendectomy for acute appendicitis over the decades, the efficacy of conservatively treated acute appendicitis raises a strong argument when choosing one of the two options. The efficacy remained consistently higher across the literature in the surgery group than in the antibiotics-only group. However, it is still arguable that antibiotics may be a preferable option given an efficacy rate of more than 70% at one year and overall higher complications associated with surgery. The argument of missing a neoplasm by avoiding surgery is valid. However, most are carcinoid neuroendocrine neoplasms with a low probability of metastasis (<5%) and are usually considered benign. Given the current practice focused on conservative and minimally invasive treatments and recently the COVID-19 pandemic, with its restrictions and lessons learnt, antibiotics may be the future standard for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Lastly, we noticed higher efficacy rates in articles published recently than those published at least five to ten years earlier. Antibiotics-only therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis is cost-effective with fewer complications than surgery. However, appendectomies have higher efficacy. Thus, surgical treatment prevails as the standard of care. Future literature should yield larger sample sizes and explore the numbers of emergency appendectomies mandated following antibiotics-only therapy.

Performance and diagnostic accuracy of scoring systems in adult patients with suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to determine the most accurate appendicitis scoring system and optimal cut-off points for each scoring system.

METHODS

This single-centred prospective cohort study was conducted from January-to-June 2021, involving all patients admitted on suspicion of appendicitis. All patients were scored according to the Alvarado score, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score, Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha (RIPASA) score and Adult Appendicitis score (AAS). The final diagnosis for each patient was recorded. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each system. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed for each scoring system, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. Optimal cut-off scores were calculated using Youden's Index.

RESULTS

A total of 245 patients were recruited with 198 (80.8%) patients underwent surgery. RIPASA score had higher sensitivity and specificity than other scoring systems without being statistically significant (sensitivity 72.7%, specificity 62.3%, optimal score 8.5, AUC 0.724), followed by the AAS (sensitivity 60.2%, specificity 75.4%, optimal score 14, AUC 0.719), AIR score (sensitivity 76.7%, specificity 52.2%, optimal score 5, AUC 0.688) and Alvarado score (sensitivity 69.9%, specificity 62.3%, optimal score 5, AUC 0.681). Multiple logistic regression revealed anorexia (p-value 0.018), right iliac fossa tenderness (p-value 0.005) and guarding (p-value 0.047) as significant clinical factors independently associated with appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

Appendicitis scoring systems have shown moderate sensitivity and specificity in our population. The RIPASA scoring system has shown to be the most sensitive, specific and easy-to-use scoring system in the Malaysian population whereas the AAS is most accurate in excluding low-risk patients.

Prediction of Diagnosis-Related Groups for Appendectomy Patients Using C4.5 and Neural Network

Due to the increasing cost of health insurance, for decades, many countries have endeavored to constrain the cost of insurance by utilizing a DRG payment system. In most cases, under the DRG payment system, hospitals cannot exactly know which DRG code inpatients are until they are discharged. This paper focuses on the prediction of what DRG code appendectomy patients will be classified with when they are admitted to hospital. We utilize two models (or classifiers) constructed using the C4.5 algorithm and back-propagation neural network (BPN). We conducted experiments with the data collected from two hospitals. The results show that the accuracies of these two classification models can be up to 97.84% and 98.70%, respectively. According to the predicted DRG code, hospitals can effectively arrange medical resources with certainty, then, in turn, improve the quality of the medical care patients receive.

Varying negative appendectomy rates after laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdominal pain, and treatment with laparoscopy has become increasingly common during the past two decades. Guidelines recommend that normal appendices are removed if operated for suspected acute appendicitis. It is unclear how many patients are affected by this recommendation. The aim of this study was to estimate the rate of negative appendectomies in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This study was reported following the PRISMA 2020 statement. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase for retrospective or prospective cohort studies (with n ≥ 100) including patients with suspected acute appendicitis. The primary outcome was the histopathologically confirmed negative appendectomy rate after a laparoscopic approach with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed subgroup analyses on geographical region, age, sex, and use of preoperative imaging or scoring systems. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

In total, 74 studies were identified, summing up to 76,688 patients. The negative appendectomy rate varied from 0% to 46% in the included studies (interquartile range 4-20%). The meta-analysis estimated the negative appendectomy rate to be 13% (95% CI 12-14%) with large variations between the individual studies. Sensitivity analyses did not change the estimate. The certainty of evidence by GRADE was moderate due to inconsistency in point estimates.

CONCLUSION

The overall estimated negative appendectomy rate after laparoscopic surgery was 13% with moderate certainty of evidence. The negative appendectomy rate varied greatly between studies.

Many diagnostic tools for appendicitis: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

We aimed to provide an overview of all diagnostic tools developed to diagnose appendicitis with their reported accuracy and to further characterize these including their need for diagnostic equipment.

METHODS

This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews and a protocol was registered at Open Science Framework. We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature. We included original articles of all languages with the purpose to derive an accessible diagnostic tool. We extracted data regarding study- and diagnostic tool characteristics, and the accuracy of each diagnostic tool.

RESULTS

The search led to 6419 records, where 74 studies were included, yielding 82 diagnostic tools reported in seven different languages. Among these tools, 35% included patient characteristics, 85% symptoms, 93% physical examinations, 37% vital signs, 78% laboratory values, and 16% imaging. Among the diagnostic tools, 35% relied on a medical doctor/surgeon with access to a laboratory, and six diagnostic tools did not require a bedside medical doctor/surgeon. The median positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity across diagnostic tools were 91%, 94%, 89%, and 86%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 82 diagnostic tools that most frequently were based on symptoms and physical examinations. Most diagnostic tools relied on a medical doctor/surgeon with access to laboratory values. The accuracy was high across the diagnostic tools.

Assessing Clinical Acumen in Predicting Acute Appendicitis in Emergency Surgery: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical acumen and experience are critical in the diagnosis of the commonest surgical emergency, acute appendicitis. However, there is an increasing focus on haematological and radiological parameters in reaching the diagnosis of appendicitis, which can negate the importance of clinical findings. The aim was to assess the accuracy of each grade of the surgical team in diagnosing acute appendicitis using clinical acuity alone and compare them to each other as well as validated predictive scores.

METHODS

A prospective single-centre study was performed over a six-month period (Dec 2020-May 2021). All patients presenting to the emergency department with right iliac fossa pain were included.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients were included of whom 35% were male. Mean age was 36.2 years (range 16-91). 51.1% had a final diagnosis of appendicitis, of which 91.3% were managed surgically and 8.7% were treated conservatively with antibiotics. Consultants were correct in their prediction of appendicitis in 84.6% of cases (females-83.4%, males-86.6%). Registrars accurately predicted appendicitis in 82.2% of patients (females-80.3%, males-85.7%), whilst house officers (SHOs) and interns were right in 73.8% (females-69.2%, males-82.5%) and 72.7% (females-66.6%, males-83.9%) of cases, respectively. In patients with a histological or radiological diagnosis of appendicitis, the mean Acute Inflammatory Response Score and Acute Appendicitis Score were 7.0 (high risk ≥ 9) and 12.5 (high risk ≥ 16), respectively. Clinicians had superior diagnostic accuracy when compared with both the clinical scores used.

CONCLUSION

Seniority was associated with improved diagnostic accuracy in clinically predicting acute appendicitis. This study showed that the clinical judgement of experienced surgeons is more reliable than clinical scores in the diagnosis of appendicitis.

Infection or Inflammation: Are Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis, Acute Cholecystitis, and Acute Diverticulitis Infectious Diseases?

Background: It is recognized increasingly that common surgical infections of the peritoneal cavity may be treated with antibiotic agents alone, or source control surgery with short-course antimicrobial therapy. By extension, testable hypotheses have emerged that such infections may not actually be infectious diseases, but rather represent inflammation that can be treated successfully with neither surgery nor antibiotic agents. The aim of this review is to examine extant data to determine which of uncomplicated acute appendicitis (uAA), uncomplicated acute calculous cholecystitis (uACC), or uncomplicated mild acute diverticulitis (umAD) might be amenable to management using supportive therapy alone, consistent with the principles of antimicrobial stewardship. Methods: Review of pertinent English-language literature and expert opinion. Results: Only two small trials have examined whether uAA can be managed with observation and supportive therapy alone, one of which is underpowered and was stopped prematurely because of challenging patient recruitment. Data are insufficient to determine the safety and efficacy of non-antibiotic therapy of uAA. Uncomplicated acute calculous cholecystitis is not primarily an infectious disease; infection is a secondary phenomenon. Even when bactibilia is present, there is no high-quality evidence to suggest that mild disease should be treated with antibiotic agents. There is evidence to indicate that antibiotic prophylaxis is indicated for urgent/emergency cholecystectomy for uACC, but not in the post-operative period. Uncomplicated mild acute diverticulitis, generally Hinchey 1a or 1b in current nomenclature, does not benefit from antimicrobial agents based on multiple clinical studies. The implication is that umAD is inflammatory and not an infectious disease. Non-antimicrobial management is reasonable. Conclusions: Among the considered disease entities, the evidence is strongest that umAD is not an infectious disease and can be treated without antibiotic agents, intermediate regarding uACC, and lacking for uAA. A plausible hypothesis is that these inflammatory conditions are related to disruption of the normal microbiome, resulting in dysbiosis, which is defined as an imbalance of the natural microflora, especially of the gut, that is believed to contribute to a range of conditions of ill health. As for restorative pre- or probiotic therapy to reconstitute the microbiome, no recommendation can be made in terms of treatment, but it is not recommended for prevention of primary or recurrent disease.

Surgical management of acute appendicitis during the European COVID-19 second wave: safe and effective

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic drove acute care surgeons to pivot from long established practice patterns. Early safety concerns regarding increased postoperative complication risk in those with active COVID infection promoted antibiotic-driven non-operative therapy for select conditions ahead of an evidence-base. Our study assesses whether active or recent SARS-CoV-2 positivity increases hospital length of stay (LOS) or postoperative complications following appendectomy.

METHODS

Data were derived from the prospective multi-institutional observational SnapAppy cohort study. This preplanned data analysis assessed consecutive patients aged ≥ 15 years who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis (November 2020-May 2021). Patients were categorized based on SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity: no infection, active infection, and prior infection. Appendectomy method, LOS, and complications were abstracted. The association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and complications was determined using Poisson regression, while the association with LOS was calculated using a quantile regression model.

RESULTS

Appendectomy for acute appendicitis was performed in 4047 patients during the second and third European COVID waves. The majority were SARS-CoV-2 uninfected (3861, 95.4%), while 70 (1.7%) were acutely SARS-CoV-2 positive, and 116 (2.8%) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. After confounder adjustment, there was no statistically significant association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and LOS, any complication, or severe complications.

CONCLUSION

During sequential SARS-CoV-2 infection waves, neither active nor prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with prolonged hospital LOS or postoperative complication. Despite early concerns regarding postoperative safety and outcome during active SARS-CoV-2 infection, no such association was noted for those with appendicitis who underwent operative management.

Gastrointestinal Ultrasound in Emergency Setting

Acute bowel diseases are responsible for more than one third of subjects who were referred to the emergency department for acute abdominal pain and gastrointestinal evaluation. Gastrointestinal ultrasound (GIUS) is often employed as the first imaging method, with a good diagnostic accuracy in the setting of acute abdomen, and it can be an optimal diagnostic strategy in young females due to the radiation exposure related to X-ray and computed tomography methods. The physician can examine the gastrointestinal system in the area with the greatest tenderness by ultrasound, thus obtaining more information and data on the pathology than the standard physical examination. In this comprehensive review, we have reported the most relevant indications and advantages to using ultrasound in the investigation of abdominal acute pain.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery for adult emergency hospital admissions with common acute gastrointestinal conditions: the ESORT study

Background

Evidence is required on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery compared with non-emergency surgery strategies (including medical management, non-surgical procedures and elective surgery) for patients admitted to hospital with common acute gastrointestinal conditions.

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the relative (1) clinical effectiveness of two strategies (i.e. emergency surgery vs. non-emergency surgery strategies) for five common acute conditions presenting as emergency admissions; (2) cost-effectiveness for five common acute conditions presenting as emergency admissions; and (3) clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the alternative strategies for specific patient subgroups.

Methods

The records of adults admitted as emergencies with acute appendicitis, cholelithiasis, diverticular disease, abdominal wall hernia or intestinal obstruction to 175 acute hospitals in England between 1 April 2010 and 31 December 2019 were extracted from Hospital Episode Statistics and linked to mortality data from the Office for National Statistics. Eligibility was determined using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis codes, which were agreed by clinical panel consensus. Patients having emergency surgery were identified from Office of Population Censuses and Surveys procedure codes. The study addressed the potential for unmeasured confounding with an instrumental variable design. The instrumental variable was each hospital’s propensity to use emergency surgery compared with non-emergency surgery strategies. The primary outcome was the ‘number of days alive and out of hospital’ at 90 days. We reported the relative effectiveness of the alternative strategies overall, and for prespecified subgroups (i.e. age, number of comorbidities and frailty level). The cost-effectiveness analyses used resource use and mortality from the linked data to derive estimates of incremental costs, quality-adjusted life-years and incremental net monetary benefits at 1 year.

Results

Cohort sizes were as follows: 268,144 admissions with appendicitis, 240,977 admissions with cholelithiasis, 138,869 admissions with diverticular disease, 106,432 admissions with a hernia and 133,073 admissions with an intestinal obstruction. Overall, at 1 year, the average number of days alive and out of hospitals at 90 days, costs and quality-adjusted life-years were similar following either strategy, after adjusting for confounding. For each of the five conditions, overall, the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around the incremental net monetary benefit estimates all included zero. For patients with severe frailty, emergency surgery led to a reduced number of days alive and out of hospital and was not cost-effective compared with non-emergency surgery, with incremental net monetary benefit estimates of –£18,727 (95% CI –£23,900 to –£13,600) for appendicitis, –£7700 (95% CI –£13,000 to –£2370) for cholelithiasis, –£9230 (95% CI –£24,300 to £5860) for diverticular disease, –£16,600 (95% CI –£21,100 to –£12,000) for hernias and –£19,300 (95% CI –£25,600 to –£13,000) for intestinal obstructions. For patients who were ‘fit’, emergency surgery was relatively cost-effective, with estimated incremental net monetary benefit estimates of £5180 (95% CI £684 to £9680) for diverticular disease, £2040 (95% CI £996 to £3090) for hernias, £7850 (95% CI £5020 to £10,700) for intestinal obstructions, £369 (95% CI –£728 to £1460) for appendicitis and £718 (95% CI £294 to £1140) for cholelithiasis. Public and patient involvement translation workshop participants emphasised that these findings should be made widely available to inform future decisions about surgery.

Limitations

The instrumental variable approach did not eliminate the risk of confounding, and the acute hospital perspective excluded costs to other providers.

Conclusions

Neither strategy was more cost-effective overall. For patients with severe frailty, non-emergency surgery strategies were relatively cost-effective. For patients who were fit, emergency surgery was more cost-effective.

Future work

For patients with multiple long-term conditions, further research is required to assess the benefits and costs of emergency surgery.

Study registration

This study is registered as reviewregistry784.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (IHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Short-term risk prediction after major lower limb amputation: PERCEIVE study

BACKGROUND

The accuracy with which healthcare professionals (HCPs) and risk prediction tools predict outcomes after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of predicting short-term (30 days after MLLA) mortality, morbidity, and revisional surgery.

METHODS

The PERCEIVE (PrEdiction of Risk and Communication of outcomE following major lower limb amputation: a collaboratIVE) study was launched on 1 October 2020. It was an international multicentre study, including adults undergoing MLLA for complications of peripheral arterial disease and/or diabetes. Preoperative predictions of 30-day mortality, morbidity, and MLLA revision by surgeons and anaesthetists were recorded. Probabilities from relevant risk prediction tools were calculated. Evaluation of accuracy included measures of discrimination, calibration, and overall performance.

RESULTS

Some 537 patients were included. HCPs had acceptable discrimination in predicting mortality (931 predictions; C-statistic 0.758) and MLLA revision (565 predictions; C-statistic 0.756), but were poor at predicting morbidity (980 predictions; C-statistic 0.616). They overpredicted the risk of all outcomes. All except three risk prediction tools had worse discrimination than HCPs for predicting mortality (C-statistics 0.789, 0.774, and 0.773); two of these significantly overestimated the risk compared with HCPs. SORT version 2 (the only tool incorporating HCP predictions) demonstrated better calibration and overall performance (Brier score 0.082) than HCPs. Tools predicting morbidity and MLLA revision had poor discrimination (C-statistics 0.520 and 0.679).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians predicted mortality and MLLA revision well, but predicted morbidity poorly. They overestimated the risk of mortality, morbidity, and MLLA revision. Most short-term risk prediction tools had poorer discrimination or calibration than HCPs. The best method of predicting mortality was a statistical tool that incorporated HCP estimation.

Association of Appendicitis Incidence With Warmer Weather Independent of Season

IMPORTANCE

Acute appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain and the most common reason for emergency surgery in several countries. Increased cases during summer months have been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence of acute appendicitis by considering local temperature patterns in geographic regions with different climate over several years.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used insurance claims data from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database and the Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits Database from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2017. The cohort included individuals at risk for appendicitis who were enrolled in US insurance plans that contribute data to the MarketScan databases. Cases of appendicitis in the inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department settings were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification or International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. Local weather data were obtained for individuals living in a metropolitan statistical area (MSA) from the Integrated Surface Database. Associations were characterized using a fixed-effects generalized linear model based on a negative binomial distribution. The model was adjusted for age, sex, and day of week and included fixed effects for year and MSA. The generalized linear model was fit with a piecewise linear model by searching each 0.56 °C in temperature for change points. To further isolate the role of temperature, observed temperature was replaced with the expected temperature and the deviation of the observed temperature from the expected temperature for a given city on a given day of year. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the daily number of appendicitis cases in a given city stratified by age and sex, with mean temperature in the MSA over the previous 7 days as the independent variable.

RESULTS

A total of 450 723 744 person-years at risk and 689 917 patients with appendicitis (mean [SD] age, 35 [18] years; 347 473 male [50.4%] individuals) were included. Every 5.56 °C increase in temperature was associated with a 1.3% increase in the incidence of appendicitis (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02) when temperatures were 10.56 °C or lower and a 2.9% increase in incidence (IRR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.03) for temperatures higher than 10.56 °C. In terms of temperature deviations, a higher-than-expected temperature increase greater than 5.56 °C was associated with a 3.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-5.7%) increase in the incidence of appendicitis compared with days with near-0 deviations.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this cohort study observed seasonality in the incidence of appendicitis and found an association between increased incidence and warmer weather. These results could help elucidate the mechanism of appendicitis.

Accessory spleen presenting with an episode of acute appendicitis; a case report of a very rare case

Introduction

The accessory spleen (AS) is a condition that results from improper placement of spleen cells. About 95 % of ASs are located in the splenic hilum proximal to the tail of the pancreas. Here we present a 23-year-old male diagnosed with AS in the appendix, following an episode of acute appendicitis.

Case presentation

A 23-year-old male patient who presented with typical symptoms of appendicitis and the examination and paraclinical findings were in favor of appendicitis. Intraoperative findings showed an inflamed appendix and a 2 cm solid mass in the mesoappendix. The pathology report showed acute appendicitis and normal spleen tissue.

Conclusion

The current study indicated an abnormal location of AS placed in the mesoappendix, which was presented with an episode of acute appendicitis.

•

The accessory spleen (AS) is a condition that results from improper placement of spleen cells.

•

About 95% of ASs are located in the splenic hilum proximal to the tail of the pancreas.

•

The remaining 5% are formed in the gastrosplenic ligament, wall of the stomach, wall of the intestine, and the mesentery or pelvic cavity

•

The current study indicated an abnormal location of AS placed in the mesoappendix, which was presented with an episode of acute appendicitis

CT scans do not reliably identify appendicoliths in acute appendicitis

Background

Both the CODA trial and the 2020 WSES Jerusalem guidelines concluded that nonoperative management of appendicitis (NOMA) was non-inferior for uncomplicated appendicitis but appendicoliths increase risk for complications. Thus "Appendicoliths on CT" are a relative contraindication to NOMA but accuracy of CT in identifying appendicoliths is just assumed.

Materials and methods

We conducted an EMR review of 1552 appendectomy patients, who had pre-operative CT scans for suspected acute appendicitis from 2001-2019. Two radiologists reinterpreted images from 2011 and 2019 for presence of appendicoliths. Appendicoliths identified on CT were compared to appendicoliths in corresponding pathology specimens. Cohorts A (2001-10) & B (2011-19) were created on account of changes in CT scanners. PPV, NPV, sensitivity and specificity rates were calculated for contemporaneous readings and for 2011 and 2019 reinterpretations.

Results

397 CT scans were read as positive for appendicoliths; 167 for A, 230 for B. 246 corresponding specimens had appendicoliths. PPV was 62% overall; 69% for A, 57% for B. 1155 scans were negative for appendicoliths. 191 corresponding specimens had appendicoliths; NPV was 83% overall; 80% for A, 87% for B. 447 specimens had appendicoliths; only 246 were identified by CT. Sensitivity was 55% overall; 48% for A, 66% for B. Specificity was 86% overall (964/1115); 91% for A, 82% for B. Radiologist accuracies varied.

Conclusions

Complicated appendicitis is often associated with appendicoliths. The assumption that CT identification of appendicoliths is reliable is unsupported by this study. CT finding of an appendicolith should not be used to exclude patients from antibiotics treatment but rather used in the shared decision-making conversation about management with patients.

Parasites in surgically removed appendices as a neglected public health concern: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of various parasitic infections in the occurrence of appendicitis is illustrated through cases recorded all over the world. The purpose of the current study was to estimate the global prevalence of parasite infestation (other than E. vermicularis) in appendectomy specimens.In the setting of the PRISMA guidelines, multiple databases (Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar) were explored in articles published until 28 September 2020. Totally, 62 studies (106 datasets) with 77, 619 participants were included in the analysis.The pooled prevalence of parasites in appendectomy samples was as follows; 0.012% (95% CI; 0.004-0.025) for Ascaris lumbricoides, 0.004% (95% CI; 0.001-0.009) for Trichuris trichiura, 0.025% (95% CI; 0.007-0.052) for Schistosoma mansoni, 0.002% (95% CI; 0.001-0.005) for Taenia spp., 0.061% (95% CI; 0.020-0.122) for Entamoeba histolytica and 0.034% (95% CI; 0.018-0.056) for Giardia lamblia.Our results demonstrated that the risk of appendicitis may increase in the presence of helminth and protozoan infections. As such, the most cases of parasites in appendectomy specimens were reported in developing countries. Regular screening plans for diagnosis, treatment and prevention are needed for prevention of parasitic infection as well as parasitic associated appendicitis, especially in endemic regions of the world.

Randomized clinical trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This aim of this study was to provide an updated meta-analysis comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy in adults (16 years or older) with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A search for randomized clinical trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy in adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from inception to 3 October 2021 in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL with no language constraints was performed. Studies were excluded if they included paediatric participants or those with complicated appendicitis. Data on complications of treatment, treatment efficacy (defined in the antibiotic group as not undergoing appendicectomy within 1 year of enrolment, versus surgery without complications or no negative histology in the appendicectomy group), readmissions, and length of stay (LOS) were presented.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 3203 participants (1613 antibiotics/1590 appendicectomy; 2041 males/1162 females) were included. There was no significant benefit of antibiotic treatment on complication rates (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95 per cent c.i. 0.41 to 1.04). Antibiotics had a reduced treatment efficacy compared with appendicectomy (RR 0.75, 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 0.89). Antibiotic treatment at 1 year was successful in 1016 of 1613 (62.9 per cent) participants. There was a six-fold increase in hospital readmissions within 1 year of enrolment in participants receiving antibiotic treatment (RR 6.28, 95 per cent c.i. 2.87 to 13.74). There was no difference in index admission LOS (mean difference 0.15 days (95 per cent c.i. -0.05 to 0.35)).

CONCLUSIONS

Earlier optimism regarding the benefits of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis does not persist at the same level now that further, large trials have been included. If antibiotic treatment is to be offered routinely as first-line therapy, patients should be counselled appropriately.

Laparoscopy uptake for paediatric appendicectomy: a comparison of general surgeons versus specialist paediatric surgeons in England from 1997 to 2015

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy is used in as many as 95% of adult appendicectomies. There is level I evidence showing that it reduces wound infection, postoperative ileus and length of inpatient stay in children compared with the open approach. The aim of this study was to report the uptake of laparoscopy for paediatric appendicectomy in England and to determine whether this was similar for general surgeons (GS) and specialist paediatric surgeons (SPS).

METHODS

Hospital Episode Statistics data were obtained for all children aged <16 years who had an OPCS 4.6 code for emergency appendicectomy from 1997 to 2015 (18 years). Data are analysed to compare rate of laparoscopic vs open procedures for GS and SPS over time and to investigate factors associated with the use of laparoscopy.

RESULTS

There were 196,987 appendicectomies and where specialty was available, 133,709 (79%) cases were undertaken by GS and 35,141 (21%) by SPS. The rate of cases undertaken with laparoscopy for both specialties combined increased from 0.8% in 1998 to 50% in 2014 (p<0.0001). In 2014, this rate was 41% for GS compared with 71% for SPS (p<0.0001). Female gender (odds ratio (OR)=1.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80-1.90), increasing age (OR=1.18, 95% CI 1.18-1.19 per year) and treatment by SPS (OR=3.71, 95% CI 3.60-3.82) were all factors positively associated with use of laparoscopy in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a vast increase in the proportion of appendicectomies undertaken laparoscopically in children. Despite adjusting for patient factors, laparoscopy was used significantly less by GS when compared with SPS. This difference is most apparent in younger children.

Suspected and Confirmed Acute Appendicitis During the COVID-19 Pandemic: First and Second Quarantines-a Prospective Study

PURPOSE

COVID-19 posed an unprecedented modern global healthcare crisis affecting both elective and urgent surgeries. The aim of this study is to evaluate the difference in the presentation of acute appendicitis (AA) before and during the COVID-19 era, the first and second quarantines.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study from December 2018 to May 2021. Two cohorts were analysed, one with patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with suspected AA and the second with confirmed AA. Both cohorts were divided into four groups: before COVID-19, during the first quarantine, between the first and second quarantine, and during the second quarantine. Data such as demographics, the time to first contact with the healthcare provider and time to operation, laboratory tests, clinical stage of AA, length of stay, and COVID-19 status were collected. A total of 469 patients were enrolled.

RESULTS

A total of 209 patients were male (45%) and 260 were female (55%), with the median age being 33 years (24-45). In the first cohort of suspected AA, there was no difference in sex; however, more older patients presented to the ED during the first quarantine (41 years) compared with other groups (28.5, 36, and 32.5 years), p < 0.000. Before the pandemic, there was a shorter duration of symptoms to first contact with the healthcare provider (13 h) compared with other groups, p = 0.001. In the second cohort of confirmed AA, there was a shorter period of time to operation from first symptoms before the pandemic (22 h) compared with other groups (30, 35, 30.5 h), p < 0.000. There were more complicated gangrenous, perforated appendicitis or periappendicular abscess in Group 2 and 3 (26, 22 and 10%, and 26, 22 and 2%, respectively) compared with Group 1 (20, 4 and 3%) and Group 4 (22, 12, and 2%), p = 0.009. Hospital stay was longer during the first quarantine (3 days) compared with other groups (2 days), p = 0.009. Six patients were COVID-19 positive: one from Group 3 and five from Group 4 (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that during the first quarantine of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was delayed presentation to the ED with suspected AA and there was a greater proportion of complicated appendicitis and longer hospitalization in confirmed cases as well.

Temporal Trends in the Investigation, Management and Outcomes of Acute Appendicitis over 15 Years in the North of England: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 8.6% for males and 6.7% for females. Despite the frequency of presentation, considerable variation in clinical practice exists. Our study aimed to explore temporal trends in the investigation, treatment and outcomes for patients with appendicitis between 2002 and 2016.

METHODS

Data collected included all patients aged ≥16 years across the NHS trusts in Northern England between 01/01/2002 and 31/12/2016 diagnosed with appendicitis. Patient demographics, co-morbidity and management strategies were included. Outcomes of interest were length of stay and inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

Over a 15 years period, 22,137 patients were admitted with acute appendicitis. A consistent male preponderance (n = 11,952, 54%) was observed, and median age increased over time (2002-2006: 36.4 vs. 2012-2016: 39.5, p < 0.001). Comorbidity of patients also increased (p < 0.001) in recent years. Computed tomography (CT) use increased from 0.8 to 21.9% (p < 0.001) over the study period. Following CT scanning, there was a longer time to theatre (1.22 vs. 0.70 days, p < 0.001), and patients were more frequently managed non-operatively (23.8% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001). The utilisation of laparoscopic approaches significantly increased from 4.1 to 70.4% (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic patients had a shorter median length of stay (2.97 days) when compared with open surgery (4.44 days) or non-operative (6.19 days) patients. The 30-day mortality rate was 0.33% overall and decreased with time (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

CT and laparoscopic surgery are increasingly utilised in the management of appendicitis. Along with other advances in clinical practice, they have led to reduced lengths of stay and mortality.

Comparison of scoring systems regarding the gender as a parameter with the traditional scoring systems for predicting appendicitis

Although acute appendicitis remains the most common cause of acute abdomen in General Surgery practice, negative appendectomy rates are still high in particularly female patients. Appendicitis scoring systems considering gender can help the clinician to reduce negative appendectomy rates in females. This present study aims to compare the Lintula, Ripasa, Fenyo-Lindberg scoring systems, which use gender as a variable, with the Alvarado, Karaman, scoring systems to evaluate which CSS is more successful in the differential diagnosis of appendicitis in females. We analyzed the records of the patients operated on with a prediagnosis of acute appendicitis in our clinic between 2020 and 2021, retrospectively. Alvarado, adult appendicitis score (AAS), appendicitis inflammatory response score (AIRS), Ripasa, Karaman, Lintula, and Fenyo Lindberg scores were calculated for each patient. The patients were divided into two groups as male and female, according to gender. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to identify the best cut-off value and assess the performance of the test score for appendicitis. Three hundred and sixty-three patients were included in the study. One hundred seventy-two (47.4%) of the patients were male, and 191 (52.6%) were female. Alvarado and AAS were the most valuable score in female (AUC: 0.805, sensitivity: 0.63, specificity: 0.83; and area under curve (AUC): 0.794, Sensitivity 0.71, Specificity: 0.76, respectively), male group (AUC: 0.828, Sensitivity: 0.71, Specificity: 0.83; and AUC: 0.834, Sensitivity 0.74, Specificity: 0.77, respectively), and when patients were not categorized by gender (AUC: 0.818, Sensitivity: 0.67 Specificity: 0.83; and AUC: 0.794, Sensitivity 0.71, Specificity: 0.76, respectively). Although the Alvarado scoring system is the first defined appendicitis scoring system, it seems as superior to the many scoring systems defined after it in predicting appendicitis, even in female patients.

[Regional and gender variations in appendicectomy : Nationwide small-area development of operation rates in the time series]

Hintergrund

Frühere Analysen kleinräumiger Appendektomieraten zeigen erheblich höhere regionale Unterschiede der Operationshäufigkeiten bei Frauen als bei Männern.

Ziel

Die Arbeit identifiziert valide Messgrößen zur Darstellung regionaler Unterschiede und analysiert geschlechtsspezifische Veränderungen der Appendektomieraten auf Landkreisebene in der Zeitreihe.

Material und Methoden

Datengrundlage sind die der DRG-Statistik entnommenen Appendektomiehäufigkeiten für 2014, 2016 sowie 2018 nach Geschlecht auf Landkreisebene. Die regionalen Unterschiede werden mittels der „systematic component of variation“ (SCV) berechnet und beurteilt. Die SCV ist im Vergleich zu Extrem-Ratio und Variationskoeffizient robuster gegenüber stark schwankender Nennerpopulationen. SCV-Werte über 5 geben einen Hinweis auf hohe Variationen und größer 10 auf sehr hohe Variationen.

Ergebnisse

Bei der männlichen Population lassen sich nur geringe regionale Unterschiede der Operationsraten feststellen, die im Zeitverlauf stabil bleiben (SCV₂₀₁₄ = 2,1, SCV₂₀₁₆ = 1,8 und SCV₂₀₁₈ = 2,0). Bei Frauen hingegen liegt die SCV in den Jahren 2014 sowie 2016 (SCV₂₀₁₄ = 6,1, SCV₂₀₁₆ = 5,3) über 5 und sinkt 2018 auf 4,5 ab. Darstellungen als Funnel-Plot berücksichtigen höhere Streuungen der Operationsraten in Landkreisen mit niedrigen Einwohnerzahlen.

Diskussion

Bei Frauen ist ein rückläufiger Trend in den Appendektomiehäufigkeiten zu erkennen. Unklar ist, ob dieser Trend auf einer Veränderung der Indikationsstellung oder auf einem geänderten allgemeinen Behandlungsmanagement bei einem Appendizitisverdacht beruht. Durch robuste Variationsmaße und der graphischen Aufbereitung als Funnel-Plots ist es möglich, systematisch bedingte regionale Versorgungsunterschiede von Zufallseffekten zu unterscheiden.

A Patient with Acute Abdominal Pain Caused by an Unnoticed Swallowed Toothpick Misdiagnosed as Acute Appendicitis

The differential diagnosis of acute abdominal pain is a challenging task for medical doctors working in the department of gastroenterology. It is clear that acute abdominal pain may be associated with a number of pathologic conditions. We report an unusual case of an unnoticed swallowed wooden toothpick stuck in the ileocecal area of a young man with right lower abdominal pain who was misdiagnosed as acute appendicitis. However, an abdominal computed tomography scan showed an elongated foreign body stuck in the ileocecal area. The elongated foreign body was identified as a wooden toothpick, which was then grasped with a foreign body forceps and successfully removed through colonoscopy. The patient's abdominal pain was significantly relieved within 2 days following treatment. On the basis of the case report, we suggest the importance of abdominal computed tomography scans for the differential diagnosis of acute abdominal pain and highlight the need for extra vigilance in excluding the diagnosis of foreign bodies in the gastrointestinal tract of patients with acute abdominal pain.

Presentation and outcomes of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned from the Middle East-a multicentre prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a striking impact on healthcare services in the world. The present study aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation management and outcomes of acute appendicitis (AA) in different centers in the Middle East.

METHODS

This multicenter cohort study compared the presentation and outcomes of patients with AA who presented during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to patients who presented before the onset of the pandemic. Demographic data, clinical presentation, management strategy, and outcomes were prospectively collected and compared.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy-one patients presented with AA during the COVID pandemic versus 1174 in the pre-COVID period. Delayed and complex presentation of AA was significantly more observed during the pandemic period. Seventy-six percent of patients underwent CT scanning to confirm the diagnosis of AA during the pandemic period, compared to 62.7% in the pre-COVID period. Non-operative management (NOM) was more frequently employed in the pandemic period. Postoperative complications were higher amid the pandemic as compared to before its onset. Reoperation and readmission rates were significantly higher in the COVID period, whereas the negative appendicectomy rate was significantly lower in the pandemic period (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a remarkable decrease in the number of patients with AA was seen along with a higher incidence of complex AA, greater use of CT scanning, and more application of NOM. The rates of postoperative complications, reoperation, and readmission were significantly higher during the COVID period.

Comparison of Clinical Features and Outcomes of Appendectomy in Elderly vs. Non-Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The objective of this study is to compare clinical and surgical outcomes of appendectomy among elderly and non-elderly subjects.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Google academic databases. Studies, observational in design, that compared peri-and postoperative outcomes of appendectomy, in patients with acute appendicitis, between elderly and non-elderly/younger subjects were considered for inclusion. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software.

Results

A total of 15 studies were included. Compared to non-elderly patients, those that were elderly had an increased risk of complicated appendicitis [relative risk (RR), 2.38; 95% CI: 2.13, 2.66], peritonitis [RR, 1.88; 95% CI: 1.36, 2.59], and conversion from laparoscopic to open appendectomy [RR, 3.02; 95% CI: 2.31, 3.95]. The risk of overall postoperative complications [RR, 2.59; 95% CI: 2.19, 3.06], intra-abdominal abscess [RR, 1.84; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.96], wound infection [RR, 3.80; 95% CI: 2.57, 5.61], and use of postoperative drainage [RR, 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.19] was higher among the elderly. The risk of readmission (30 days) [RR, 1.61; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.24] and mortality (30 days) [RR, 12.48; 95% CI: 3.65, 42.7] was also higher among elderly.

Conclusions

Findings suggest an increased risk of peri-and postoperative complications among elderly subjects undergoing appendectomy, compared to non-elderly subjects.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021286157.

The treatment of acute appendicitis in two age-based groups during COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective experience in a COVID-19 referral hospital

PURPOSE

During the past months, the Italian Government has reduced the restrictions and access to hospitals as well as outpatient. Since then, up to 40% of non-traumatic abdominal emergencies have had unusual delayed treatment. Given the rapidly evolving situation and the absence of evidence to support recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is useful to assess how the current situation is influencing the management of elderly patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Between February 2020 and December 2020, all patients 18 years or older undergone appendectomy were included. Patients were divided in two age-based groups (young groups, YG; elderly group, EG). Surgical approach, hospital stay, post-operative complications, radiology reports, and histologic examination were included in the retrospective analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred eight patients underwent appendectomy, 81 patients into the YG, and 27 in the EG. Laparoscopy was performed in 87.7% of the YG and in 51.8% of the elderly (p < 0.000), while conversion to laparotomy was necessary in 3.7% in the YG vs 22.3% of the other group (p < 0.009). Open procedures were more frequent in the EG, 25.9% vs 8.6% (p value < 0.05). No mortality rate was reported in both groups; moreover, the mean hospital stay was greater in the EG than the YG (p < 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Our data highlighted a partial delay in diagnosis in the elderly group, and an increase in complicated appendicitis also demonstrated by the need for conversion to laparotomy despite no significant relationship between these findings and the histologic examination was reported.

A Retrospective Analysis of Conservative Management Versus Early Surgical Intervention in Appendicular Lump

Introduction

Acute appendicitis happens to be increasingly common in school-going children and early part of adult life, peak incidence reaching in the teens and early twenties. Luminal obstruction of the vermiform appendix is thought to be essential for the development of appendicular ischemia, gangrene, and perforation. The treatment of choice in acute appendicitis is emergency appendectomy. Appendicitis particularly puts the surgeon in a dilemma whenever the patient presents late by around four to seven days. In case of delay in presentation, complications like appendicular lump formation occur. The factors that make the clinical presentation inconsistent which in turn makes the diagnosis challenging in the case of acute appendicitis are the variable position of the appendix, the degree/grade of inflammation, and the age of the patient.

At present, the standard treatment is the Ochsner-Sherren regimen universalized by Oschner and has been mostly practised over many decades as the standard care for the appendicular lump. Conservative regimen does not work in a few cases where urgent surgical exploration is necessary. This study was conducted to compare early appendectomy versus conservative management followed by interval appendectomy in case of appendicular mass and to make a better strategy for effective management of patients with complicated appendicitis.

Methods

A total of 112 patients were diagnosed as having an appendicular lump as per the available records between June 2018 and June 2021. The total study population was divided into two comparative groups depending upon the treatment they received. The patients in group-1 received medical treatment and those in group-2 had undergone surgical management. The patients in group-1 were treated according to the Ochsner-Sherren regimen. The patients in group-2 were the patients in whom emergency appendectomy was done. If the general condition of the patient did not improve, pain and tenderness didn’t subside, the size of phlegmon or abscess was increasing and other features of the acute abdomen were persistent, then it was regarded as a failure of medical treatment and the patient was prepared for surgery on an emergency basis.

Results

Out of 1192 cases of acute appendicitis admitted between June 2018 and June 2021, a total of 112 patients were diagnosed with an appendicular lump. As per the record, 64 patients were managed conventionally as per the Ochsner-Sherren regimen followed by elective interval appendectomy (group-1) and 48 cases were managed with an emergency surgical procedure (group-2).

In group-1, out of 64 patients, non-operative treatment was successful in 58 patients (90.62%). Among the remaining patients, there was a failure of non-operative treatment in six patients and they were subjected to emergency surgical exploration (9.37%). So a total of 58 patients underwent interval appendectomy after six weeks. Out of 54 patients who had undergone emergency appendectomy in both groups, the per-operative finding was an appendicular lump in 55.5% of patients while a total of 44 patients in group-2, were discharged from the hospital within six days (91.66%). But in group-1, only 16 patients were discharged from the hospital within six days (25%), rest were discharged from the hospital after more than seven days of stay.

Conclusion

Early appendectomy in appendicular mass is safe due to the improvements in surgical techniques and better postoperative care.

The Role of Neutrophil-Lymphocyte-Ratio (NLR) and Platelet-Lymphocyte-Ratio (PLR) as a Biomarker for Distinguishing Between Complicated and Uncomplicated Appendicitis

Introduction Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common acute general surgical presentations affecting 7% of the population at some point in their lifetime. The ability to assess the risk of complicated appendicitis (CA) from uncomplicated appendicitis (UA) in acute appendicitis (AA) could reduce the associated morbidity and mortality. The value of platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR) as an inflammatory marker increases when its fluctuations are interpreted along with other complementary hematologic indices, such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), which provides additional information about the disease activity. Hence, we postulated that NLR and/or PLR could serve as a potential surrogate marker in assessing the severity of AA. Aim This study aims to investigate the use of PLR and/or NLR as a surrogate biomarker in differentiating uncomplicated from complicated appendicitis. Material and methods This retrospective study was conducted at Russells Hall Hospital from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2020. Data of all patients over age 16 years that had histologically confirmed appendicitis were retrieved. NLR and PLR were calculated from the admission hemogram, and the ratios were compared between uncomplicated (UA) or complicated appendicitis (CA). Cut-off values were calculated using the summarized ROC curve; in addition, the sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals were determined using SPSS 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results A total of 799 patients were analyzed, of which 469 (58.7%) were female. The median age was 31.2 years. The difference between NLR and PLR within the two appendicitis groups was significant (P=0.05; Kruskal-Wallis). Cohen's kappa (degree of inter-rater agreement) between NLR and PLR showed a moderate agreement of 0.589 (P<0.001). We equally demonstrated an exponential relationship between PLR and NLR (R2 =0.510, P<0.05). For UA, the area under the curve (AUC) and the cut-off for NLR and PLR were 0.715, 4.75 with a confidence interval (CI) of 0.678-0.653 and 0.632, 155 with a CI of 0.591-0.672, respectively. For CA, using NLR and PLR, the AUC and cut-off were 0.727, 6.96 with a CI of 0.687-0.768 and 0.653, 180.5 with a CI of 0.602-0.703, respectively; all were significant with a P of <0.001. Conclusion NLR and PLR are a reliable, less cumbersome surrogate biomarker for assessing the severity of acute appendicitis.

Re-Assessment in Patients with Suspected Acute Appendicitis

Background: The effect of diagnosing appendicitis at re-assessment on post-operative outcomes is not clear. This study aims to compare patients diagnosed with appendicitis at initial presentation versus patients who were diagnosed at re-assessment. Patients and Methods: Data from the Dutch SNAPSHOT appendicitis collaborative was used. Patients with appendicitis who underwent appendectomy were included. Effects of diagnosis at re-assessment were compared with diagnosis at initial presentation. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with complicated appendicitis and the post-operative complication rate. Results: Of 1,832 patients, 245 (13.4%) were diagnosed at re-assessment. Re-assessed patients had a post-operative complication rate comparable to those diagnosed with appendicitis at initial presentation (15.1% vs. 12.7%; p = 0.29) and no substantial difference was found in the proportion of patients with complicated appendicitis (27.9% vs. 33.5%; p = 0.07). For patients with complicated appendicitis, more post-operative complications were seen if diagnosed at re-assessment than if diagnosed initially (38.2% vs. 22.9%; p = 0.006). Conclusions: For patients in whom appendicitis was not diagnosed at first presentation, but at re-assessment, both the proportion of complicated appendicitis and the post-operative complication rate were comparable to those who were diagnosed with appendicitis at initial presentation. However, re-assessed patients with complicated appendicitis encountered more post-operative complications.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis remains a difficult disease to diagnose, and imaging adjuncts are commonly employed. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging test that can be used to diagnose appendicitis. It is not commonly regarded as a first-line imaging test for appendicitis, but the reported diagnostic accuracy in some studies is equivalent to computed tomography (CT) scans. As it does not expose patients to radiation, it is an attractive imaging modality, particularly in women and children.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting appendicitis in all patients. Secondary objectives: To investigate the accuracy of MRI in subgroups of pregnant women, children, and adults. To investigate the potential influence of MRI scanning variables such as sequences, slice thickness, or field of view.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until February 2021. We searched the references of included studies and other systematic reviews to identify further studies. We did not exclude studies that were unpublished, published in another language, or retrospective.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that compared the outcome of an MRI scan for suspected appendicitis with a reference standard of histology, intraoperative findings, or clinical follow-up. Three study team members independently filtered search results for eligible studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently extracted study data and assessed study quality using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy - Revised (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate model to calculate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 58 studies with sufficient data for meta-analysis including a total of 7462 participants (1980 with and 5482 without acute appendicitis). Estimates of sensitivity ranged from 0.18 to 1.0; estimates of specificity ranged from 0.4 to 1.0. Summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.97); summary specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97). Sensitivity and specificity remained high on subgroup analysis for pregnant women (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99); specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.98); 21 studies, 2282 women); children (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97); specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98); 17 studies, 2794 children); and adults (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97); specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.98); 9 studies, 1088 participants), as well as different scanning techniques. In a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients, there would be 12 false-positive results and 30 false-negative results. Methodological quality of the included studies was poor, and the risk of bias was high or unclear in 53% to 83% of the QUADAS-2 domains.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

MRI appears to be highly accurate in confirming and excluding acute appendicitis in adults, children, and pregnant women regardless of protocol. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low due to incomplete and low standards of follow-up, so summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity may be biased. We could not assess the impact and direction of potential bias given the very low number of high-quality studies. Studies comparing MRI protocols were few, and although we found no influence of MRI protocol variables on the summary estimates of accuracy, our results do not rule out that some MRI protocols are more accurate than others.