Classification of acute appendicitis (CAA): treatment directed new classification based on imaging (ultrasound, computed tomography) and pathology

Abdominal drainage to prevent intraperitoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis

RATIONALE

This is the third update of a Cochrane review first published in 2015 and last updated in 2021. Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed primarily for acute appendicitis. People who undergo appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, are more likely to suffer postoperative complications in comparison to uncomplicated appendicitis. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and five trials registers, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors, to identify studies for inclusion in the review. The latest search date was 12 October 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in people with complicated appendicitis comparing (1) use of drain versus no drain, (2) open drain versus closed drain, or (3) different schedules for drain removal. We excluded studies in which not all participants received antibiotics after appendectomy.

OUTCOMES

Our critical outcome was intraperitoneal abscess. Important outcomes were wound infection, morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay.

RISK OF BIAS

We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess the risk of bias in RCTs and quasi-RCTs.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

We synthesised the results for each outcome in a meta-analysis using the random-effects model, except for the Peto odds ratio, which only has a fixed-effect model. We planned to use the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) approach to report studies when it was not possible to undertake a meta-analysis of effect estimates. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

INCLUDED STUDIES

We included eight studies (five RCTs and three quasi-RCTs) with a total of 739 paediatric and adult participants, of which 370 participants were randomised to the drainage group and 369 participants to the no-drainage group. The studies were conducted in North America, Asia, and Africa and published between 1973 and 2023. The majority of participants had perforated appendicitis with local or general peritonitis. All participants received antibiotic regimens after open or laparoscopic appendectomy. All studies were at overall high risk of bias.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

Use of drain versus no drain We assessed the certainty of the evidence for 30-day mortality as moderate due to imprecision. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for all other outcomes as very low, downgraded mainly due to high risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effects of abdominal drainage versus no drainage on intraperitoneal abscess at 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 2.12; 7 studies, 671 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection at 30 days (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.45; 7 studies, 696 participants), and morbidity at 30 days (RR 1.84, 95% CI 0.14 to 24.50; 2 studies, 124 participants) in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Approximately 113 (57 to 221 participants) out of 1000 participants in the drainage group developed intraperitoneal abscess, compared with 104 out of 1000 participants in the no-drainage group. There were seven deaths in the drainage group (N = 291) compared with one in the no-drainage group (N = 290); abdominal drainage probably increases the risk of 30-day mortality (Peto odds ratio 4.88, 95% CI 1.18 to 20.09; 6 studies, 581 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Abdominal drainage may increase hospital stay by 1.58 days (95% CI 0.86 to 2.31; 5 studies, 516 participants; very low-certainty evidence) in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, but the evidence is very uncertain. Open drain versus closed drain No studies compared open drain versus closed drain for complicated appendicitis. Early versus late drain removal No studies compared early versus late drain removal for complicated appendicitis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain whether abdominal drainage prevents intraperitoneal abscess, wound infection, or morbidity in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Abdominal drainage may increase hospital stay in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, but the evidence is very uncertain. Consequently, there is no evidence for any clinical improvement with the use of abdominal drainage in people undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. The increased risk of mortality with drainage comes from eight deaths observed in paediatric and adult participants undergoing open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine the effects of drainage on mortality outcomes.

FUNDING

This Cochrane review was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 81701950, 82172135), Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing (Grant No. CSTB2022NSCQ-MSX0058, cstc2021jcyj-msxmX0294), Medical Research Projects of Chongqing (Grant No. 2018MSXM132, 2023ZDXM003, 2024jstg028), and the Kuanren Talents Program of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University.

REGISTRATION

Registration: not available. Protocol and previous versions available via doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010168, doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010168.pub2, doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010168.pub3, and doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010168.pub4.

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.

Phlegmonous appendicitis as a variant of uncomplicated appendicitis

Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of surgical acute abdomen, and its classification into uncomplicated, phlegmonous, and complicated forms is crucial for guiding treatment strategies. This study aims to compare the preoperative laboratory findings and postoperative outcomes of phlegmonous appendicitis with uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. This retrospective cohort study included 1,441 patients who underwent appendectomy between January 2019 and March 2021 at Ankara Bilkent City Hospital. Patients were classified based on histopathological findings into four groups: normal appendix, uncomplicated appendicitis, phlegmonous appendicitis, and complicated appendicitis. Preoperative laboratory values, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay were analyzed. The distribution of patients was as follows: Group A (normal appendix, 7.6%), Group B (uncomplicated appendicitis, 59.8%), Group C (phlegmonous appendicitis, 17.6%), and Group D (complicated appendicitis, 15%). Phlegmonous appendicitis exhibited significantly higher leukocyte counts and appendix diameters compared to uncomplicated appendicitis but had lower CRP values than complicated appendicitis. The median hospital stay was similar for Groups A, B, and C (1 day) but significantly longer for Group D (2.1 days, p < 0,001). Complication rates were highest in Group D (24.1%) compared to the other groups. While phlegmonous appendicitis shares some clinical and laboratory characteristics with complicated appendicitis, its postoperative outcomes align more closely with those of uncomplicated appendicitis. This suggests that phlegmonous appendicitis may be more accurately classified as a variant of uncomplicated appendicitis, emphasizing the need for consistent classification to improve treatment strategies and patient outcomes.

Current management of acute appendicitis in adults: What you need to know

ABSTRACT

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common acute surgical diseases in the world today. Acute appendicitis can present with a well-recognized clinical presentation with abdominal pain which localize in the right lower quadrant. This presentation is more typical in men than in women of child baring age. Several clinical and laboratory calculations can be used to increase the likelihood of making a correct diagnosis. Various imaging modalities can be used to make the diagnosis which include ultrasound, computer tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Each study has well known sensitivity/specificity of positive predictive value of making the diagnosis of appendicitis. The management of acute appendicitis is based on the presentation of the patient and dividing it into uncomplicated and complicated disease. Each requires management with antibiotics and followed with timely appendectomy. Recent studies have demonstrated nonoperative management of uncomplicated appendicitis without no fecalith that can be managed with antibiotics alone. Complicated acute appendicitis should undergo timely surgical intervention. Patients presenting with a large appendiceal abscess or phlegmon should undergo percutaneous drainage and antibiotic management. There are certain patient populations that should be considered for surgical intervention. Pregnant patients as well as immunosuppressed patients should undergo timely surgical intervention to decrease the risk of complications. This review outlines the current principles of the diagnosis, imaging, and treatment of acute appendicitis based on the best available evidence of acute appendicitis in adults.

C-Reactive Protein, International Normalized Ratio, and Fibrinogen in Diagnostic Scale of Complicated Acute Appendicitis

Background/Objectives: Differentiating complicated acute appendicitis (CA) and uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UC) is essential to guide clinical management. While CA requires urgent surgical management, UC can be treated with antibiotic therapy in selected cases. However, accurate identification of CA remains a clinical challenge. This study aimed to identify factors associated with CA and to develop a diagnostic severity scale. Methods: In this retrospective study, we included 132 adult patients (>16 years) with a confirmed postsurgical diagnosis of appendicitis, of whom 52 had CA and 80 had UA. Signs, symptoms, comorbidities, laboratory values, and ultrasonographic findings were evaluated to determine predictive factors and construct a diagnostic scale. Results: The factors most significantly associated with CA were elevated plasma concentrations of C-reactive protein (>7.150 mg/dL), fibrinogen (481.5 mg/dL), International Normalized Ratio (INR) (>1.150), and the presence of free fluid periappendicular. The combination of these factors within one scale showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, with a sensitivity of 78.75% and a specificity of 82.69%. Conclusions: Serum C-reactive protein concentration, fibrinogen, and INR can be employed individually or as part of a scale as important indicators in diagnosing CA.

Update on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical emergencies in adults and children [...].

Inflammatory Signals Across the Spectrum: A Detailed Exploration of Acute Appendicitis Stages According to EAES 2015 Guidelines

Background: In this retrospective study, we evaluate the diagnostic utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) and leucocyte count within the EAES 2015 guidelines for acute appendicitis (AA) in differentiating uncomplicated (UAA) from complicated AA (CAA). Methods: Conducted at a tertiary care center in Germany, the study included 285 patients over 18 years who were diagnosed with AA from January 2019 to December 2021. Patient data included demographics, inflammatory markers, and postoperative outcomes. Results: CRP levels (Md: 60.2 mg/dL vs. 10.5 mg/dL; p < 0.001) and leucocyte count (Md: 14.4 Gpt/L vs. 13.1 Gpt/L; p = 0.016) were higher in CAA. CRP had a medium diagnostic value for detecting CAA (AUC = 0.79), with a cutoff at 44.3 mg/L, making it more likely to develop CAA. Leucocyte count showed low predictive value for CAA (AUC = 0.59). CRP ≥ 44.3 mg/L was associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications (OR: 2.9; p = 0.002) and prolonged hospitalization (OR: 3.5; p < 0.001). Conclusions: CRP, within the context of the EAES classification, presents as a valuable diagnostic marker to distinguish CAA from UAA, with a higher risk of postoperative complications and hospitalization. Leucocyte count showed low diagnostic value for the identification of CAA.

Is appendoscope a new option for the treatment of acute appendicitis?

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency. It is commonly caused by obstruction of the appendiceal lumen due to fecaliths, tumors, or lymphoid hyperplasia. For over a century, appendectomy has been the primary treatment for acute appendicitis. Abraham Groves performed the first open appendectomy in 1883. In 1983, Kurt Semm completed the first laparoscopic appendectomy, heralding a new era in appendectomy. However, appendectomy is associated with certain complications and a rate of negative appendectomies. Studies have suggested controversy over the impact of appendectomy on the development of inflammatory bowel disease and Parkinson's disease, but an increasing number of studies indicate a possible positive correlation between appendectomy and colorectal cancer, gallstones, and cardiovascular disease. With the recognition that the appendix is not a vestigial organ and the advancement of endoscopic te-chnology, Liu proposed the endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy. It is an effective minimally invasive alternative for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Our team has developed an appendoscope with a disposable digital imaging system operated through the biopsy channel of a colonoscope and successfully applied it in the treatment of appendicitis. This article provides an overview of the progress in endoscopic treatment for acute appendicitis and offers a new perspective on the future direction of appendiceal disease treatment.

Clinical Scoring Systems to Diagnose Complicated Acute Appendicitis in a Rural Hospital: Are They Good Enough?

Introduction Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common surgical emergency in developed countries, whose incidence peaks in the second and third decades. The risk of mortality in uncomplicated AA is very low. There are many scoring systems to predict AA. Prediction scores are used less frequently to predict complicated AA. Rural hospitals are often constrained by a lack of round-the-clock imaging or special laboratory services, which may enable accurate diagnosis. Materials and methods This study aimed to determine whether prediction scores without imaging or C-reactive protein (CRP) levels could predict complicated AA in a rural setting. All cases of AA for the previous 13 months were recruited for the study. Demographic data, clinical signs and symptoms, complete blood counts, intraoperative findings, and the corresponding histopathological results were collated. The scoring systems (Alvarado, RIPASA, Tzanakis, and Ohmann) were calculated from the clinical and laboratory data. Demographic variables, clinical features, and histopathological findings are described as frequencies/proportions. Chi-squared and Student's t-tests were used to analyze differences between patients with complicated and uncomplicated AA. A receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) and determine whether appendicitis scores could predict complicated AA. Results There were 76 patients with a mean age of 29.1±13.0 years. Serositis was observed in 65% of the patients; mucosal ulceration was the most common microscopic finding, with a pathological diagnosis of AA in 58 (76.3%) patients. Rovsing's sign and the presence of phlegmon and granuloma were significantly different between those with and without complicated AA. The clinical prediction scores were not significantly different between the two groups. The Tzanakis and Ohmann scores were significant (cutoff: 6.5 and 7.25, p=0.001 and 0.01, respectively) in diagnosing AA (sensitivity/specificity of 98.3/66.7 and 98.3/94.4, respectively). With a cutoff of 5.75, the RIPASA score, with an AUC of 0.663 (p=0.09), showed the highest sensitivity (90.7) and specificity (76.6) for diagnosing complicated AA. Conclusion Diagnosing AA based solely on clinical presentation remains a challenge. This study showed that clinical scores such as those of Alvarado, RIPASA, Tzanakis, and Ohmann could not accurately predict complicated AA. Scoring systems without imaging and intraoperative diagnoses are not infallible; therefore, histopathological examination of the resected appendix is mandatory.

Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2017. Acute appendicitis (inflammation of the appendix) can be simple or complicated. Appendiceal phlegmon and appendiceal abscess are examples of complicated appendicitis. Appendiceal phlegmon is a diffuse inflammation in the bottom right of the appendix, while appendiceal abscess is a discrete inflamed mass in the abdomen that contains pus. Appendiceal phlegmon and abscess account for 2% to 10% of acute appendicitis. People with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess usually need an appendicectomy to relieve their symptoms (e.g. abdominal pain, loss of appetite, nausea, and vomiting) and avoid complications (e.g. peritonitis (infection of abdominal lining)). Surgery for people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess may be early (immediately after hospital admission or within a few days of admission), or delayed (several weeks later in a subsequent hospital admission). The optimal timing of appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess is debated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of early appendicectomy compared to delayed appendicectomy on overall morbidity and mortality in people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and five trials registers on 11 June 2023, together with reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs that randomised 828 participants to early or delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon (7 trials) or appendiceal abscess (1 trial). The studies were conducted in the USA, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. All RCTs were at high risk of bias because of lack of blinding and lack of published protocols. They were also unclear about methods of randomisation and length of follow-up. 1. Early versus delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon We included seven trials involving 788 paediatric and adult participants with appendiceal phlegmon: 394 of the participants were randomised to the early appendicectomy group (open or laparoscopic appendicectomy as soon as the appendiceal mass resolved within the same admission), and 394 were randomised to the delayed appendicectomy group (initial conservative treatment followed by delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy several weeks later). There was no mortality in either group. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of early appendicectomy on overall morbidity (risk ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 2.86; 3 trials, 146 participants; very low-certainty evidence), the proportion of participants who developed wound infections (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.02; 7 trials, 788 participants), and the proportion of participants who developed faecal fistulas (RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.36 to 8.49; 5 trials, 388 participants). Early appendicectomy may reduce the abdominal abscess rate (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.80; 4 trials, 626 participants; very low-certainty evidence), reduce the total length of hospital stay by about two days (mean difference (MD) -2.02 days, 95% CI -3.13 to -0.91; 5 trials, 680 participants), and increase the time away from normal activities by about five days (MD 5.00 days; 95% CI 1.52 to 8.48; 1 trial, 40 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. 2. Early versus delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendiceal abscess We included one trial involving 40 paediatric participants with appendiceal abscess: 20 were randomised to the early appendicectomy group (emergent laparoscopic appendicectomy), and 20 were randomised to the delayed appendicectomy group (initial conservative treatment followed by delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy 10 weeks later). There was no mortality in either group. The trial did not report on overall morbidity, various complications, or time away from normal activities. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of early appendicectomy on the total length of hospital stay (MD -0.20 days, 95% CI -3.54 to 3.14; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the comparison of early versus delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy for paediatric and adult participants with appendiceal phlegmon, very low-certainty evidence suggests that early appendicectomy may reduce the abdominal abscess rate. The evidence is very uncertain whether early appendicectomy prevents overall morbidity or other complications. Early appendicectomy may reduce the total length of hospital stay and increase the time away from normal activities, but the evidence is very uncertain. For the comparison of early versus delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for paediatric participants with appendiceal abscess, data are sparse, and we cannot rule out significant benefits or harms of early versus delayed appendicectomy. Further trials on this topic are urgently needed and should specify a set of criteria for use of antibiotics, percutaneous drainage of the appendiceal abscess prior to surgery, and resolution of the appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. Future trials should include outcomes such as time away from normal activities and length of hospital stay.

Is LigaSure Alone Sufficient for the Closure of the Appendix Stump?

PURPOSES

Closure of the appendix stump is necessary for laparoscopic appendectomy. Problems that occur during the appendix stump closure can cause severe morbidity. Several methods of stump closure have been described. This study aimed to investigate the adequacy of LigaSure alone in closing the appendix stump.

METHODS

Patients who were operated on with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis between October 2021 and January 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to the closure technique of the appendix stump hemoclip(group I) and LigaSure only(group II). In addition, demographic data (age, gender), body mass index (BMI), presence of comorbid disease, perioperative appendicitis classification, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, radiological and pathological appendix size of the patients included in the study were recorded. Clavien Dindo was used for postoperative complication assessment.

RESULT

The study included 77 patients. 48(62.3%) of the patients were in group I, and 29(37.7%) were in group II. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding age, gender distribution, BMI, presence of comorbid disease (P > .05). The operation time of group I was longer than group II (P < .001). There was no difference between the groups in terms of both radiological and pathological appendix size. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding postoperative complications and severity of complications (P = .76, P = .99, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Appendiceal stump closure can be performed with Ligasure, but it should be noted that this procedure can be performed on selected patients, as in the study group, not on all patients.

Incidental Appendico-Ileal Fistula in a Patient With Adhesive Intestinal Obstruction: A Case Report

A fistulous communication between the appendix and any viscus is rare. Such fistula is most often acquired due to recurrent appendicitis, cystic fibrosis, Crohn's disease, tuberculosis, and malignancy. Here in, we report a rare case of an appendico-ileal fistula incidentally detected during laparotomy for adhesive small bowel obstruction. The fistula was divided, the ileal opening was sutured, and appendectomy was performed. Postoperative recovery was uneventful, with no evidence of malignancy, tuberculosis, or inflammatory bowel disease on the histopathological examination of the appendix.

Diagnostic Utility of Serum Leucine-Rich α-2-Glycoprotein 1 for Acute Appendicitis in Children

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic utility of serum leucine-rich α-2-glycoprotein 1 (LRG1) in pediatric patients with acute abdominal pain, admitted to the emergency surgical unit, in order to make a prompt and accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pediatric patients older than 5 years of age who presented to the emergency department from 15 October 2021 to 30 June 2022 with acute abdominal pain and suspected acute appendicitis were prospectively recruited in the study. Demographic and clinical data, as well as operative and postoperative data, were recorded. A total of 92 patients were equally distributed into two groups: children with acute appendicitis who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and non-appendicitis patients, presenting with non-specific abdominal pain. LRG1 levels were determined using a commercially available LRG1 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit. Serum LRG1 levels, as well as other inflammatory markers (white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) and absolute neutrophil count) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The median level of LRG1 in serum was significantly higher in the group of children with pathohistologically confirmed acute appendicitis than in the control group, at 350.3 µg/mL (interquartile range (IQR) 165.2-560.3) and 25.7 µg/mL (IQR 14.7-36.8) (p < 0.001), respectively. Receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for LRG1 from serum was 1.0 (95% CI 0.96-1.00; p < 0.001) and the value of >69.1 µg/mL was found to perfectly separate acute appendicitis cases from controls. Additionally, as expected, each of the examined laboratory inflammatory markers provided a significantly higher values in the acute appendicitis group compared to the control group: WBC 14.6 × 109/L (IQR 12.7, 18.7) vs. 7.0 × 109/L (IQR 5.4, 9.0) (p < 0.001), CRP 16.3 mg/dL (IQR 6.9, 50.4) vs. 2.2 mg/dL (IQR 2, 2) (p < 0.001) and absolute neutrophil count 84.6% (IQR 79.5, 89.0) vs. 59.5% (IQR 51.5, 68.6) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LRG1 in the serum was found to be a promising novel biomarker, with excellent differentiation of acute appendicitis from non-appendicitis cases in children presenting with non-specific abdominal pain.

Ultrasound in Sepsis and Septic Shock-From Diagnosis to Treatment

Sepsis and septic shock are among the leading causes of in-hospital mortality worldwide, causing a considerable burden for healthcare. The early identification of sepsis as well as the individuation of the septic focus is pivotal, followed by the prompt initiation of antibiotic therapy, appropriate source control as well as adequate hemodynamic resuscitation. For years now, both emergency department (ED) doctors and intensivists have used ultrasound as an adjunctive tool for the correct diagnosis and treatment of these patients. Our aim was to better understand the state-of-the art role of ultrasound in the diagnosis and treatment of sepsis and septic shock.

METHODS

We conducted an extensive literature search about the topic and reported on the data from the most significant papers over the last 20 years.

RESULTS

We divided each article by topic and exposed the results accordingly, identifying four main aspects: sepsis diagnosis, source control and procedure, fluid resuscitation and hemodynamic optimization, and echocardiography in septic cardiomyopathy.

CONCLUSION

The use of ultrasound throughout the process of the diagnosis and treatment of sepsis and septic shock provides the clinician with an adjunctive tool to better characterize patients and ensure early, aggressive, as well as individualized therapy, when needed. More data are needed to conclude that the use of ultrasound might improve survival in this subset of patients.

Diagnostic, Therapy and Complications in Acute Appendicitis of 19,749 Cases Based on Routine Data: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery. The gold standard treatment is surgery. Complications may occur during or after an appendectomy. In addition to age, clinically important factors for the outcome after appendicitis seems to be the comorbidities and the stage of the appendicitis at the time of the operation. Large observational data describing these facts are missing. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter observational study, all inpatients over the age of 17 years with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis in 47 hospitals of the Clinotel Hospital Group between 2010 and 2017 were included. Results: A total of 19,749 patients with acute appendicitis were operated on. The number of patients with more than five secondary diagnoses has increased from 8.4% (2010) to 14.5% (2017). The number of secondary diagnoses correlates with the ages of the patients and leads to a significantly longer hospital stay. Computer tomography (CT) has gained in importance in recent years in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. A total of 19.9% of patients received a CT in 2017. Laparoscopic appendectomy increased from 88% in 2010 to 95% in 2017 (p < 0.001). The conversion rate did not change relevant in the study period (i.e., 2.3% in 2017). Appendicitis with perforation, abscess, or generalized peritonitis was observed in 24.8% of patients. Mortality was 0.6% during the observation period and was associated with age and the number of secondary diagnoses. The analysis is based on administrative data collected primarily for billing purposes, subject to the usual limitations of such data. This includes partially incomplete clinical data. Conclusions: Multimorbidity is increasingly present in patients with acute appendicitis. Mortality is still in an acceptably low range with no increase. A CT scan is necessary for a precise diagnosis in unclear clinical situations to avoid unnecessary operations and was performed more often at the end of the study than at the beginning.

Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Abdominal Surgery for Neonates and Paediatrics: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Consensus Study

Surgical site infections (SSIs), i.e., surgery-related infections that occur within 30 days after surgery without an implant and within one year if an implant is placed, complicate surgical procedures in up to 10% of cases, but an underestimation of the data is possible since about 50% of SSIs occur after the hospital discharge. Gastrointestinal surgical procedures are among the surgical procedures with the highest risk of SSIs, especially when colon surgery is considered. Data that were collected from children seem to indicate that the risk of SSIs can be higher than in adults. This consensus document describes the use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in neonates and children that are undergoing abdominal surgery and has the purpose of providing guidance to healthcare professionals who take care of children to avoid unnecessary and dangerous use of antibiotics in these patients. The following surgical procedures were analyzed: (1) gastrointestinal endoscopy; (2) abdominal surgery with a laparoscopic or laparotomy approach; (3) small bowel surgery; (4) appendectomy; (5) abdominal wall defect correction interventions; (6) ileo-colic perforation; (7) colorectal procedures; (8) biliary tract procedures; and (9) surgery on the liver or pancreas. Thanks to the multidisciplinary contribution of experts belonging to the most important Italian scientific societies that take care of neonates and children, this document presents an invaluable reference tool for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in the paediatric and neonatal populations.