A Prospective Treatment Protocol for Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis

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.

Improving sustainability and mitigating the environmental impact of anaesthesia and surgery along the perioperative journey: a narrative review

Climate change, environmental degradation, and biodiversity loss are adversely affecting human health and exacerbating existing inequities, intensifying pressures on already strained health systems. Paradoxically, healthcare is a high-polluting industry, responsible for 4.6% of global greenhouse gas emissions and a similar proportion of air pollutants. Perioperative services are among the most resource-intensive healthcare services and are responsible for some unique pollutants. Opportunities exist to mitigate pollution throughout the entire continuum of perioperative care, including those that occur upstream of the operating room in the process of patient selection and optimisation, delivery of anaesthesia and surgery, and the postoperative recovery period. Within a patient-centred, holistic approach, clinicians can advocate for healthy public policies that modify the determinants of surgical illness, can engage in shared decision-making to ensure appropriate clinical decisions, and can be stewards of healthcare resources. Innovation and collaboration are required to redesign clinical care pathways and processes, optimise logistical systems, and address facility emissions. The results will extend beyond the reduction of public health damages from healthcare pollution to the provision of higher value, higher quality, patient-centred care.

SAGES guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is an extremely common disease with a variety of medical and surgical treatment approaches. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians and patients in decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted from 2010 to 2022 to answer 8 key questions relating to the diagnosis of appendicitis, operative or nonoperative management, and specific technical and post-operative issues for appendectomy. The results of this systematic review were then presented to a panel of adult and pediatric surgeons. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts.

RESULTS

Conditional recommendations were made in favor of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis being managed operatively, either delayed (>12h) or immediate operation (<12h), either suction and lavage or suction alone, no routine drain placement, treatment with short-term antibiotics postoperatively for complicated appendicitis, and complicated appendicitis previously treated nonoperatively undergoing interval appendectomy. A conditional recommendation signals that the benefits of adhering to a recommendation probably outweigh the harms although it does also indicate uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations should provide guidance with regard to current controversies in appendicitis. The panel also highlighted future research opportunities where the evidence base can be strengthened.

Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-effectiveness of Outpatient Surgery for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The PENDI-CSI Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of outpatient appendectomy in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND

Given that acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdomen, the introduction of outpatient appendectomy protocols could significantly improve the effectiveness and sustainability of health care systems.

METHODS

A total of 300 patients were enrolled from October 2018 to June 2021 in the PENDI-CSI randomized clinical trial: 149 were assigned to the outpatient surgery (OPS) group and 151 to the inpatient surgery (IPS) group, followed by 1 month postoperatively. All patients were aged older than 14 years and had uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, neoplasms, inflammatory bowel disease, and high anesthetic risk (ASA IV). The OPS group was discharged from the postanesthesia care unit while the IPS group was admitted.

RESULTS

In total, 128 patients in the OPS group (85.9%) were discharged without admission. Predictors whether patients in the OPS group had to be admitted were aged over 31 years [relative risk (RR): 2.42 (1.04-5.65)], hypertension [RR: 6.21 (3.22-11.97)], anesthetic risk II-III [RR: 2.63 (1.17-5.94)], previous abdominal surgery [RR: 3.34 (1.55-7.20)], postoperative pain with visual analog scale >6 [RR: 4.28 (2.67-6.86)], and postoperative fear [RR: 2.2 (1.04-4.67)]. There were no differences in terms of complications, readmissions, and reinterventions, and the perceived quality was similar in both groups. The outpatient modality produced savings of €1 034.97 per patient ( P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient appendectomy is safe and effective for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patient-perceived quality is similar to that of IPS, although it successfully reduces hospital costs compared with inpatient appendectomy.

Non-operative treatment of acute appendicitis in children: clinical efficacy of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in a retrospective single-centre study

BACKGROUND

The success rate of non-operative treatment (NOT) of acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA) in children varies from 65% to 95%. There are no recommendations on the appropriate antibiotic therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical efficacy of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid for NOT of AUA in children.

METHODS

Design: Cross-sectional study in a single medical centre.

SETTINGS

Emergency department and Paediatric Visceral Surgery department of the Children Hospital in Toulouse, France.

PATIENTS

Patients 5-15 years old who were diagnosed with appendicitis, (1) With abdominal pain and a first episode of acute appendicitis, (2) With no radiological or ultrasound evidence of appendicolith, appendiceal perforation, pelvic abscess nor peritonitis, and (3) With non-septic general aspect, were included.

INTERVENTIONS

NOT consisted of hospital admission. The antibiotic treatment was a combination of amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (80 mg/kg/day of amoxicillin): intravenous regimen during 48 hours followed by oral route during 7 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Success rate of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid NOT in children with AUA at 2 years.

RESULTS

The initial success rate of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid NOT in children with AUA was 100% (104/104 patients). The success rate at 2 years was 85.6% (89/104) at discharge. None of the 15 patients who underwent surgery after recurrence of appendicitis presented with peritonitis, appendiceal perforation nor pelvic abscess.

CONCLUSION

Narrowed antibiotic therapy with amoxicillin and clavulanic acid seems to be an alternative to surgery in children with AUA. It is necessary to wait for the results of ongoing studies to confirm these results.

Appendicitis in Children

The management of pediatric appendicitis continues to advance with the development of evidence-based treatment algorithms and a recent shift toward patient-centered treatment approaches. Further research should focus on development of standardized institution-specific diagnostic algorithms to minimize rates of missed diagnosis and appendiceal perforation and refinement of evidence-based clinical treatment pathways that reduce complication rates and minimize health care resource utilization.

Age-related disparities and trends in national healthcare spending for management of appendicitis in the United States: A retrospective cost-analysis

BACKGROUND

Changes in clinical care for appendicitis have impacted healthcare use associated with treatment. We evaluated national trends and assessed factors associated with healthcare costs for appendicitis in the United States.

DESIGN

The Disease Expenditure Project, the Global Burden of Disease study, and the National Inpatient Sample were used to estimate total national expenditures, per-capita costs for incident cases, and factors associated with inpatient costs for appendicitis management, respectively. The national estimates of appendicitis costs were obtained from 1996 to 2016. Appendicitis incidence was estimated to calculate per-capita costs. After application of survey weights for the stratified sample design, 191,180 weighted discharges for appendicitis from the 2016 National Inpatient Sample study were evaluated. The Disease Expenditure Project and the Global Burden of Disease study were used to estimate total and per-capita spending. Temporal trends were evaluated using joinpoint regression, expressed as annual percent change. Multivariable linear regression was used to evaluate patient factors associated with total hospital charges.

RESULTS

In 2016, total spending on appendicitis was $9.3 billion (95% confidence interval: $8.0-$10.8], a 2-fold increase from $4.7 billion ($4.0-$5.3) in 1996. Per-capita spending decreased significantly after 2011 (annual percent change -3.7% [-4.4% to -2.9%]). Patients ≥65 years accounted for 64.1% (61.1%-67.3%) of total spending for appendicitis. The hospital charges for older patients were significantly higher among those undergoing appendectomy.

CONCLUSION

Overall healthcare spending for appendicitis has doubled from 1996 to 2016, but per capita spending has decreased since 2011, driven by improved efficiency of inpatient care. Nearly two-thirds of spending is on patients ≥65 years, with significantly higher costs associated with surgical management in this population.

Are only a few hours adequate for hospitalisation following mini-incision open appendectomy in paediatric patients?

BACKGROUND

A very short hospital length of stay following an open appendectomy in children with acute simple appendicitis has never been mentioned yet in the literature. The authors reviewed the outcome of these paediatric patients who were treated with the open technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this analytical cohort observational study, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of the 115 consecutive patients who underwent open appendectomy from June 2017 to July 2021.

RESULTS

There were 84 patients whose appendices were inflammatory or suppurative and appendectomies were done only through McBurney's point. Of these, the average age was 9.11 ± 2.67 years. The mean length of the incision was 1.95 ± 0.48 cm. Nearly one-third (25/85) were discharged within 3 h following surgery. Of the remaining cases, nine patients were discharged within the same day. There were increased percentages of patients who were eligible for early discharge in each consecutive year.

CONCLUSION

The idea of immediate discharge within 3 h seems to be feasible for children with acute simple appendicitis who were treated with open appendectomy. We believe that the practice will be widely acknowledged and proceed to reduce the resources and the expenses in the hospital.

Outpatient management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis after laparoscopic appendectomy: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To confirm the safety and efficacy of outpatient management of laparoscopic appendectomy, with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, in adult patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible and secure in selected patients in observational studies. The benefits include reduced length of stay (LOS) and postoperative complications. This is the first randomized controlled trial of outpatient management following ERAS protocol.

METHODS

Patients admitted from the emergency department with acute appendicitis were randomized into one of two groups: standard care within the hospital (HG) or the outpatient group (OG). An ERAS protocol was followed for both groups. Patients in the HG were admitted to the surgical ward. Patients in the OG were referred to the day-surgery unit. The primary endpoint was the length of stay.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients were included: 49 in the OG and 48 in the HG. LOS was significantly shorter in the OG (mean 8.82 h) than in the HG (mean 43.53 h), p < 0.001. There was no difference in readmission rates (p = 0.320); we observed only one readmission in the OG. No further emergency consultations or complications were observed. The cost saving was $516.52/patient as a result of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient management of appendectomy is safe and feasible procedure in selected patients. This approach could become the standard of care for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, showing fewer complications, lower LOS and cost.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (NCT05401188) Clinical Trial ID: NCT05401188.

Post-Operative Day Zero Discharge after Laparoscopic Appendectomy Does Not Worsen High-Yield Outcomes: A NSQIP Database Observational Study

Background: Post-operative day zero (POD-0) discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis has been studied primarily in single-center or pediatric studies. A larger study from a national sample addressing high-yield outcomes can update and supplement current literature and evaluate early discharge rates.Methods: This is a retrospective, observational National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database study of laparoscopic appendectomies for uncomplicated appendicitis performed 2016-2019, with discharge POD-0 or post-operative day one (POD-1). Study outcomes included any or serious complication, unplanned readmission, and unplanned return to operating room (OR). Unadjusted outcomes comparisons were estimated via chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to adjust for potential confounders (sex, ethnicity, frailty, ASA score, tobacco use and diabetes).Results: A total of 25,629 patients were included in this analysis. More patients were discharged POD-1 (n = 15,229) than POD-0 (n = 10,440). Rate of any or serious complication was lower in patients discharged POD-0 than POD-1 (any complication: 2.0 vs. 2.8, p = 0.0002, serious complication: 1.4 vs. 2.1, p < 0.0001). Unplanned return to OR and unplanned readmission rates were not different between POD-0 and POD-1 discharged groups (p = 0.9 and p = 0.6, respectively). These findings were robust to adjustment for covariates in logistic regression modeling.Conclusions: This study found that unplanned readmission and other outcomes do not appear to be adversely affected by early discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis, confirming prior evidence on the topic in a large, national sample. It also found that early discharge does not appear to be used in most of these patients.

Ambulatory Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Does the Conventional Approach Need a Reappraisal?

A Deucalione, acute abdomen remains significant in abdominal pain. The entity of acute abdomen accounts for up to 10% of all emergency admissions. The differences between countries' income and level of prosperity are pertinent, particularly in terms of severity, radiological modalities, and surgical management of the condition. Of note, surgical modalities have been the most widely used treatment modality, and current evidence indicates that the laparoscopic approach, per se, is the most effective surgical therapy with a lower incidence of wound infection, post-intervention morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and better quality of life scores compared to the conventional method. In light of this, the present study aimed to evaluate ambulatory appendectomy in a series of sequential laparoscopic appendectomies (LApp), which included both complicated and uncomplicated cases.

Same-day discharge after appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Patients presenting with acute appendicitis are usually hospitalized for a few days for appendectomy and postoperative recovery. Shortening length of stay may reduce costs and improve patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of same-day discharge after appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to April 14, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and selected studies that addressed discharge on the same calendar day as the appendectomy. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool. Main outcomes were hospital readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits in the postoperative course. A random effects model was used to pool risk ratios for the main outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1912 articles screened, 17 comparative studies and 8 non-comparative studies met the inclusion criteria. Most only included laparoscopic procedure for uncomplicated appendicitis. Most studies were considered at moderate or serious risk of bias. In meta-analysis, same-day discharge (vs. overnight hospitalization) was not associated with increased rates of readmission, complication, and unplanned hospital visits. Non-comparative studies demonstrated low rates of readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits after same-day discharge.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that same-day discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis is safe without an increased risk of readmission, complications, or unplanned hospital visits. Hence, same-day discharge may be further encouraged in selected patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration no. CRD42018115948.

Comparing the Postoperative Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Three Port Appendectomy With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Acute Appendicitis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and 3-port conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol.

METHODS

Of 101 laparoscopic appendectomy with ERAS protocol cases for appendicitis from March 2019 to April 2020, 54 patients underwent SILA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 1) while 47 patients received CLA with multimodal analgesic approach (group 2). SILA and CLA were compared with the single institution's ERAS protocol. To adjust for baseline differences and selection bias, operative outcomes and complications were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM, well-matched 35 patients in each group were evaluated. Postoperative hospital stays for patients in group 1 (1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.037) were significantly lesser than those for patients in group 2. However, opioid consumption (2.0 mg vs. 1.4 mg, P=0.1) and the postoperative scores of visual analogue scale for pain at 6 hours (2.4±1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.260) and 12 hours (2.4 ± 2.0 vs. 2.9 ± 1.5, P = 0.257) did not show significant difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

SILA resulted in shortening the length of hospitalization without increase in complications or readmission rates compared to CLA with ERAS protocol.

Association of Nonoperative Management Using Antibiotic Therapy vs Laparoscopic Appendectomy With Treatment Success and Disability Days in Children With Uncomplicated Appendicitis

Importance

Nonoperative management with antibiotics alone has the potential to treat uncomplicated pediatric appendicitis with fewer disability days than surgery.

Objective

To determine the success rate of nonoperative management and compare differences in treatment-related disability, satisfaction, health-related quality of life, and complications between nonoperative management and surgery in children with uncomplicated appendicitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Multi-institutional nonrandomized controlled intervention study of 1068 children aged 7 through 17 years with uncomplicated appendicitis treated at 10 tertiary children's hospitals across 7 US states between May 2015 and October 2018 with 1-year follow-up through October 2019. Of the 1209 eligible patients approached, 1068 enrolled in the study.

Interventions

Patient and family selection of nonoperative management with antibiotics alone (nonoperative group, n = 370) or urgent (≤12 hours of admission) laparoscopic appendectomy (surgery group, n = 698).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The 2 primary outcomes assessed at 1 year were disability days, defined as the total number of days the child was not able to participate in all of his/her normal activities secondary to appendicitis-related care (expected difference, 5 days), and success rate of nonoperative management, defined as the proportion of patients initially managed nonoperatively who did not undergo appendectomy by 1 year (lowest acceptable success rate, ≥70%). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for differences between treatment groups for all outcome assessments.

Results

Among 1068 patients who were enrolled (median age, 12.4 years; 38% girls), 370 (35%) chose nonoperative management and 698 (65%) chose surgery. A total of 806 (75%) had complete follow-up: 284 (77%) in the nonoperative group; 522 (75%) in the surgery group. Patients in the nonoperative group were more often younger (median age, 12.3 years vs 12.5 years), Black (9.6% vs 4.9%) or other race (14.6% vs 8.7%), had caregivers with a bachelor's degree (29.8% vs 23.5%), and underwent diagnostic ultrasound (79.7% vs 74.5%). After IPTW, the success rate of nonoperative management at 1 year was 67.1% (96% CI, 61.5%-72.31%; P = .86). Nonoperative management was associated with significantly fewer patient disability days at 1 year than did surgery (adjusted mean, 6.6 vs 10.9 days; mean difference, -4.3 days (99% CI, -6.17 to -2.43; P < .001). Of 16 other prespecified secondary end points, 10 showed no significant difference.

Conclusion and Relevance

Among children with uncomplicated appendicitis, an initial nonoperative management strategy with antibiotics alone had a success rate of 67.1% and, compared with urgent surgery, was associated with statistically significantly fewer disability days at 1 year. However, there was substantial loss to follow-up, the comparison with the prespecified threshold for an acceptable success rate of nonoperative management was not statistically significant, and the hypothesized difference in disability days was not met.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02271932.

Enhanced Recovery After Emergency Surgery: Utopia or Reality?

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) constitutes the application of a series of perioperative measures based on the evidence, in order to achieve a better recovery of the patient and a decrease of the complications and the mortality. These ERAS programs initially proved their advantages in the field of colorectal surgery being progressively adopted by other surgical areas within the general surgery and other surgical specialties. The main excluding factor for the application of such programs has been the urgent clinical presentation, which has caused that despite the large volume of existing literature on ERAS in elective surgery, there are few studies that have investigated the effectiveness of these programs in surgical patients in emergencies. The aim of this article is to show ERAS measures currently available according to the existing evidence for emergency surgery.

Factors affecting non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis in children: Should laparoscopic appendectomy be immediate, interval, or emergency?

INTRODUCTION

We conducted a prospective non-randomized comparison of children with uncomplicated appendicitis treated either by primary laparoscopic appendectomy (PLA) or by non-operative management (NOM) followed by interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) if NOM was successful or emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (ELA) if NOM was unsuccessful.

METHODS

Before 2015, all patients with uncomplicated appendicitis underwent PLA using a standard three-port technique. Postoperatively, piperacillin/tazobactam was administered until the white blood cell count was less than 10 000/μL and patients were afebrile. Since 2015, in cases of uncomplicated appendicitis, intravenous analgesia has been administered once after assessment, and then NOM has been immediately employed, with repeat doses of piperacillin/tazobactam administered every 8 h after admission. We have also used standard management cut-off criteria to determine when to perform laparoscopic appendectomy after NOM: if NOM fails, ELA is performed within 6 h, and if NOM is successful, ILA is planned.

RESULTS

There were 103 eligible subjects for this study. Eleven cases of suspected complicated appendicitis were excluded, leaving 34 PLA cases and 58 NOM cases. After NOM, 27 patients were treated with ILA and 31 with ELA. There was one recurrence after successful NOM, and in two cases, patients' parents refused to consent to ILA after successful NOM. There were more perforations and significantly more residual abscesses in ELA than in PLA. Operative time and postoperative hospitalization were significantly longer among ELA patients than among PLA patients, and operative time was significantly shorter during ILA than in PLA.

CONCLUSION

Further evaluation is required to confirm which patients will benefit most from NOM and what role PLA has in treating uncomplicated appendicitis.

Preoperative Clinical Factors Associated with Short-Stay Laparoscopic Appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Outpatient appendectomy for acute appendicitis is a feasible, yet not widely performed procedure, as there are no universally accepted criteria for patient selection. The aim of this study was to assess preoperative clinical factors associated with successful short-stay appendectomy (SSA) and establish a predictive score to help with patient selection.

METHODS

All consecutive laparoscopic appendectomies performed in our institution between January 2013 and June 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Several preoperative clinical and biological variables were compared between patients with SSA, defined as a postoperative stay <24 h, and those needing inpatient care. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify variables independently associated with SSA, and these variables were then used to create a predictive score.

RESULTS

A total of 578 patients were included, 303 (53%) in the SSA group and 275 (48%) in the long-stay appendectomy (LSA) group. In multivariate analysis, male gender (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.12-2.31, p = 0.010), ASA class I-II (OR 9.52, 95% CI 1.65-180.69, p = 0.037), absence of generalized guarding (OR 3.55, 95% CI 1.30-11.41, p = 0.019), C-reactive protein <100 mg/dl (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.81-5.42, p < 0.001) and leukocyte count <20 g/l (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.02-4.30, p = 0.046) were independently associated with SSA. These five parameters were used to construct a predictive score, whereby ≥17 (range 0-21) was defined as the optimal threshold to predict SSA with a high sensitivity (95.6%) and negative predictive value (82.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

A purely clinical predictive score based on five widely used preoperative parameters can be used to identify eligible patients for short-stay appendectomy.

Ambulatory versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity due to the improved understanding of patient selection criteria, the application of enhanced recovery pathways, and the potential for improving healthcare resource utilization. The aim of the review was to compare the morbidity and readmission rates between ambulatory and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Studies from 2014 to 2018, on adult patients undergoing ambulatory LA, were considered. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool the total number of complications and readmission events in the ambulatory and conventional groups.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies met our inclusion criteria accounting for 7079 total of patients with acute appendicitis treated by ambulatory LA and 6370 patients treated by conventional LA. We included four observational studies (two prospective and two retrospective) and one randomized controlled trial. Length of stay was significantly lower in the ambulatory group (mean difference = - 15.63 h, 95% CI = - 21.78 to - 9.49, P = < 0.00001). The relative risk (RR) of reoperation was 0.49 (95% CI = 0.12-1.95, P = 0.31). The results demonstrated a pooled RR of overall morbidity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.65-0.97, P = 0.02) and a pooled RR of readmission of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.59-0.88, P = 0.002), both results favoring the ambulatory LA group.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of high-quality comparative studies making conclusive recommendations not possible at this time. Based on current data, ambulatory LA may be safe and feasible as compared with conventional LA.

Multi-institutional trial of non-operative management and surgery for uncomplicated appendicitis in children: Design and rationale

Traditionally, children presenting with appendicitis are referred for urgent appendectomy. Recent improvements in the quality and availability of diagnostic imaging allow for better pre-operative characterization of appendicitis, including severity of inflammation; size of the appendix; and presence of extra-luminal inflammation, phlegmon, or abscess. These imaging advances, in conjunction with the availability of broad spectrum oral antibiotics, allow for the identification of a subset of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis that can be successfully treated with antibiotics alone. Recent studies demonstrated that antibiotics alone are a safe and efficacious treatment alternative for patents with uncomplicated appendicitis. The objective of this study is to perform a multi-institutional trial to examine the effectiveness of non-operative management of uncomplicated pediatric appendicitis across a group of large children's hospitals. A prospective patient choice design was chosen to compare non-operative management to surgery in order to assess effectiveness in a broad population representative of clinical practice in which non-operative management is offered as an alternative to surgery. The risks and benefits of each treatment are very different and a "successful" treatment depends on which risks and benefits are most important to each patient and his/her family. The patient-choice design allows for alignment of preferences with treatment. Patients meeting eligibility criteria are offered a choice of non-operative management or appendectomy. Primary outcomes include determining the success rate of non-operative management and comparing differences in disability days, and secondarily, complication rates, quality of life, and healthcare satisfaction, between patients choosing non-operative management and those choosing appendectomy.

Successful implementation of an appendectomy process improvement protocol

Background

A key component of a process improvement program is the institution of hospital-specific protocols to address certain disparities and streamline patient care. In that regard, we evaluated the implementation of an outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy (OLA) protocol at a tertiary military hospital. We hypothesized that OLA would reduce length of stay (LOS) without increasing complications.

Methods

In August 2016, our institution implemented an OLA protocol-defined as discharge within 24 hours of surgery. Exclusion criteria included age <18 years old, grade 4 or 5 appendicitis, immunosuppression, current pregnancy, and no supervision during the first 24 hours postdischarge. To determine OLA's effect on LOS, analysis of variance was used to perform a comparison between the years 2014 and 2017. Successful outpatient appendectomies were recorded preprotocol and postprotocol, as well as readmission complications.

Results

In 2017, the first full year of protocol implementation, 44 of 59 (75%) patients met the inclusion criteria, and all but 2 (42 of 44, 95%) stayed for less than 24 hours. Of the two outliers, one developed acute on chronic kidney disease and one had a slow return of bowel function following grade 3 appendicitis. Complications were low across all years (one per year). In 2017, the readmission was for percutaneous drainage of an abscess. Overall, protocol implementation produced a significant decrease in LOS.

Discussion

OLA protocol decreased LOS at a military hospital and should be expanded to other department of defense (DoD) facilities. Further research is needed to identify cost benefit to the military health system.

Level of evidence

III.

Same-Day Discharge after Non-Perforated Laparoscopic Appendectomy Is Safe

Purpose: Several single-center studies have demonstrated same-day discharge (SDD) to be safe in adults undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for non-perforated appendicitis (NPA). The proportion of SDD appendectomy patients nationally is unknown. We sought to identify the incidence of SDD among patients undergoing LA after NPA hypothesizing a similar risk of complications including superficial surgical site infections (SSSIs), post-operative intra-abdominal abscess, and 30-day readmission rates. Materials and methods: The 2016-2017 ACS-NSQIP Procedure-Targeted Appendectomy database was queried for adults undergoing LA with no intraoperative findings of perforation or abscess. Patients with SDD were compared to those discharged within two days. A multivariable logistic regression model was used for analysis. Results: From 16,931 patients undergoing LA, 3988 (23.6%) were SDD. Compared to those with a longer hospital stay, patients with SDD were of similar age (p = 0.29) and less likely to have a contaminated wound-class (58.5% vs. 62.6%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age and comorbidities, patients with SDD had a similar risk of 30-day readmission (p = 0.088) and post-operative abscess (p = 0.739) but lower risk of SSSI (OR: 0.48, 0.28-0.82, p = 0.008), compared to those discharged within two days. Conclusions: Nearly a quarter of patients with NPA undergoing LA are discharged the same day. The risk of 30-day readmission is similar compared to those with a longer index hospital stay. Interestingly, the risk of SSSI is lower, however this may be related to differences in wound classification and/or selection bias. Regardless, SDD for NPA patients appears safe and should be utilized whenever possible.

Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis as Day Case Surgery: Can Outcomes of a Prospective Study Be Reproduced in Real Life?

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of day case surgery (DCS) appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UCAA) was evaluated by the prospective AppendAmbu (Feasibility of Outpatient Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis) study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01839435). The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-life feasibility of DCS for UCAA.

STUDY DESIGN

This single-center, retrospective, non-interventional study was conducted after the AppendAmbu study and included UCAA only. The primary end point was DCS success rate (ie length of stay <12 hours) in the intention-to-treat population (all patients with UCAA) and in the per-protocol population (population with UCAA and no preoperative and intraoperative exclusion criteria). The secondary end points were to determine the DCS quality criteria to evaluate and compare the morbidity and mortality of DCS and conventional hospitalization for UCAA (Clavien, Comprehensive Complication Index) and to externally validate the St Antoine criteria for the selection of patients for DCS.

RESULTS

From January 2016 to September 2017, two hundred and ninety-six patients underwent operations for acute appendicitis. The proportion of patients with successful DCS management was 27% in the intention-to-treat population and 95% in the per-protocol population. The unplanned consultation rate was 15%, the unplanned hospitalization rate was 4%, and the unplanned reoperation rate was 0%. The postoperative morbidity of patients managed by DCS was not different from that of patients managed in conventional hospitalization. The DCS success rate was 0%, with a St Antoine score of 0, and 80% of patients had a St Antoine score of 5 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Day case surgery constitutes progress in surgery as a result of enhanced recovery programs. It avoids unnecessary prolonged hospitalization.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol allows ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy in uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a prospective, randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Previous observational studies have demonstrated the safety of discharging patients after laparoscopic appendectomy within the same day without hospitalization. The application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines has resulted in shorter length of stay, fewer complications, and reduction in medical costs. The aim of this study was to investigate if ERAS protocol implementation in patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis decreases the length of stay enough to allow for ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial, 108 patients were randomized into two groups: laparoscopic appendectomy with ERAS (LA-E) or laparoscopic appendectomy with conventional care (LA-C). The primary endpoint was postoperative length of stay. The secondary end points were time to resume diet, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, re-admission rate, and reoperation rate.

RESULTS

From January 2016 through May 2017, 50 patients in the LA-E group and 58 in the LA-C were analyzed. There were no significant differences in preoperative data. Regarding the primary end point of the study, the ERAS protocol significantly reduced the postoperative length of stay with a mean of 9.7 h (SD: 3.1) versus 23.2 h (SD: 6.8) in the conventional group (p < 0.001). The ERAS protocol allowed ambulatory management in 90% of the patients included in this group. There was a significant reduction in time to resume diet (110 vs. 360 min, p < 0.001) and less moderate-severe postoperative pain (28 vs. 62.1%, p < 0.001) in the LA-E versus LA-C group. The rate of complications, readmissions, and reoperations were comparable in both groups (p = 0.772).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation was associated with a significantly shorter length of stay, allowing for the ambulatory management of this group of patients. Ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and feasible with similar rates of morbidity and readmissions compared with conventional care.

Should ambulatory appendectomy become the standard treatment for acute appendicitis?

Background

Appendectomy is increasingly performed as a 'short stay' or 'ambulatory' procedure, yet there is no consensus for selection of patients with acute appendicitis for ambulatory surgery (AS). We aimed to compare characteristics and outcomes of complicated and uncomplicated appendectomies performed in ambulatory vs. conventional settings, and to determine factors associated with unexpected re-consultations and re-hospitalizations.

Methods

The authors reviewed a consecutive series of 185 laparoscopic appendectomies. Whenever possible, patients were offered AS, defined as 'discharge on the same working day.' Multivariable regressions were performed to determine associations of unexpected re-consultations and re-hospitalizations with surgery type (ambulatory or conventional) and patient characteristics (age, gender, obesity, symptoms, appendicolith, perforations, appendix diameter, serologic results, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and Saint-Antoine score).

Results

From the initial cohort, 117 patients (63.2%) were eligible for AS, of which 8 had peri- or post-operative contraindications. Therefore, 109 patients (58.9%) were operated by AS, with median length of stay 8.5 h (range, 3.3-20.5). Ambulatory cases had a lower incidence of complications (11.9%) than conventional cases (25.0%) (p = 0.029). Uni- and multi-variable regressions revealed that unexpected re-consultations were not significantly associated with any of the pre- or peri-operative variables but that unexpected re-hospitalizations were 4 times more likely for patients with appendicolith (OR, 4.32; p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Ambulatory surgery could be considered as a standard procedure for both complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Appendicolith was found to be an independent risk factor for unexpected re-hospitalization and should therefore trigger closer monitoring.

Outpatient Appendectomy in an Emergency Outpatient Surgery Unit 24 h a Day: An Intention-to-Treat Analysis of 194 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of patients operated on for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UAA) in our 24-h emergency outpatient surgery unit.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study with intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. From 12/2013 to 03/2015, all consecutive patients admitted for acute appendicitis (AA) were prospectively screened. A computed tomography or abdominal ultrasound confirmed the diagnosis of AA. Eligibility criteria for outpatient appendectomy were: UAA, no comorbidity, no physical or mental condition preventing participation in the study, absence of pregnancy, age older than 15 years, an accompanying adult person available for the hospital discharge and place of residence within 1 h of our hospital. In the case of intraoperative complication (abscess, local or general peritonitis) or complication of general anesthesia, patients were excluded from the outpatient pathway. The primary endpoint was the feasibility of outpatient appendectomy among all consecutive patients admitted for UAA.

RESULTS

Of the 194 screened patients, 150 (77%) presented an UAA and 102 (68%) were eligible for an outpatient procedure. Thirteen eligible patients (13%) were excluded from the outpatient circuit (7 intraoperative and 6 postoperative contraindications). Outpatient appendectomy was performed in 89 patients, representing 59% (89/150) of the ITT population and 87% (89/102) of the eligible patients. The median length of hospital stay was 13 h. Postoperative complications were observed in six patients (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports a safe and feasible management of UAA. Our organization allows a short hospitalization for postoperative recovery without using conventional surgery beds and enables discharge throughout the night.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Report on 1164 Operations at a Single-Institution, Safety-Net Hospital

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the standard of care for the treatment of acute appendicitis. There is an ongoing debate regarding the optimal management of appendicitis, which led us to study outcomes after an appendectomy at a large safety-net hospital. We hypothesize that despite a high-risk population, LA remains a safe and effective treatment for acute appendicitis. A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent an appendectomy from 2011 to 2013. The primary end point was significant morbidity defined as a score of three or greater on the Clavien-Dindo scale of surgical morbidity. Thousand hundred and sixty-four patients underwent an appendectomy. A total of 1102 (94.7%) patients underwent either an LA or laparoscopic converted to open appendectomy, and 62 (5.3%) patients underwent an open appendectomy (OA). Two hundred and forty six patients (21.1%) had complicated appendicitis. Laparoscopic converted to OA conversion rate was 4.4 per cent and differed between years (P < 0.001). LA had a significantly shorter length of stay, shorter length of postoperative antibiotics, and less postoperative morbidity. When limited to only patients with complicated appendicitis, major morbidity was still greater in the OA group (22.6 vs 52.0%, P = 0.001). Length of stay was significantly longer in the OA group [3.42 (2.01, 5.97) vs 7.04 (5.05, 10.13), P < 0.001]. Odds for complication were 2.6 times greater in the OA group compared with the LA group. In the absence of peritonitis and systemic illness necessitating urgent laparotomy, patients who are laparoscopic surgical candidates should be offered an LA. Our study demonstrates that these patients have better outcomes and shorter hospital stays.

Resource savings and outcomes associated with outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative admission for acute appendicitis utilizes health care system resources. We evaluated outcomes and hospital charges for children with nonperforated appendicitis who underwent outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed for patients ≤18years old who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in 2015. Patients were categorized into discharge from postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (outpatient), admission for <24-h, and admission for >24-h. Continuous variables were compared using analysis of variance and categorical variables were compared using chi-square test, with p<0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Of the 171 patients identified, 63 (37%) were discharged from the PACU, 94 (55%) were admitted <24-h, and 14 (8%) were admitted >24-h. There were no differences in postoperative emergency department/clinic visits, complications, or readmissions. Hospital charges for admission <24-h and >24-h were $1007 and $2237 more per patient than the PACU-discharge group, respectively. Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomies became more common over time, occurring in only 20% of patients with acute appendicitis in the first quarter of the year versus 49% of patients in the last quarter.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis in children is a safe practice that decreases length of stay and hospital charges. Adoption of an outpatient strategy allows for better standardization of care and can lead to savings in health care resources.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III (Treatment: retrospective comparative study).

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be successfully performed for uncomplicated appendicitis: A Southwestern Surgical Congress multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Many laparoscopic procedures are now performed on an outpatient basis. We hypothesize laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed as an outpatient procedure.

METHODS

Seven institutions adopted a previously described outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy protocol for uncomplicated appendicitis. Patients were dismissed unless there was a clinical indication for admission. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, time of dismissal, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Two hundred six men and one hundred seventy women with a mean age of 35.4 years were included in the protocol. Seventy-eight patients (21%) had pre-existing comorbidities. 299 patients (80%) were managed as outpatients. There were no conversions to open appendectomy. Postoperative morbidity was 5%. The time of patient dismissals was evenly distributed throughout the day and night. Twelve patients (3%) required readmission. Outpatient follow-up occurred in 63% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

An outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy protocol was successfully applied at multiple institutions with low morbidity and low readmission rates. Application of this practice nationally could reduce length of stay and decrease overall health care costs for acute appendicitis.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy Protocol Expedites Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis

Bed availability remains a constant struggle for tertiary care centers resulting in the use of management protocols to streamline patient care and reduce length of stay (LOS). A standardized perioperative management protocol for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UA) was implemented in April 2014 to decrease both CT scan usage and LOS. Patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for UA from April 2012 to May 2013 (PRE group) and April 2014 to May 2015 (POST group) were compared retrospectively. There were no differences in patient demographics or clinical findings between the groups. All patients in the PRE group had a CT scan for the diagnosis of appendicitis, whereas there was a 14 per cent decrease in the POST group (P = 0.002). There was a significant decrease in median LOS between the groups [PRE 1.3 vs POST 0.9 days; (P < 0.001)]. There was no difference in subsequent emergency department visits for complications [3 (4%) vs 4 (4%); P = 1.0] or 30-day readmission rate [1 (1%) vs 5 (5%); P = 0.22] between the groups. A standardized perioperative management protocol for UA patients significantly decreased CT scan utilization and LOS without compromising patient care.

Interventions to optimize recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

No enhanced recovery after surgery protocol has been published for laparoscopic appendectomy. This was a review of evidence-based interventions that could optimize recovery after appendectomy.

METHODS

Interventions for the review Clinical pathway, fast-track or enhanced recovery protocols; needlescopic approach; single incision laparoscopic (SIL) approach; natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES); regional nerve blocks; intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA); drains. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science Core Collection. Study eligibility criteria Randomized controlled trial (RCT); prospective evaluation with historical controls for studies assessing clinical pathways/protocols. Participants People undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Meta-analysis, random effects model.

RESULTS

Clinical pathways for laparoscopic appendectomy were safe in selected patients, but may be associated with a higher readmission rate. Needlescopic surgery offered no recovery advantage over traditional laparoscopic appendectomy. SIL afforded no recovery advantage over conventional laparoscopic surgery, but may increase operative time in children. The search found no RCT on NOTES appendectomy. Transversus abdominis plane blocks did not significantly reduce pain after laparoscopic appendectomy. IPLA should be considered in laparoscopic appendectomy; studies in paediatric surgery are needed. The search found no RCT on the use of drains in appendectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified gaps in the literature on optimizing recovery after laparoscopic appendectomy and found the need for more randomized controlled trials on regional anaesthesia and intraperitoneal local anaesthesia in children.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Feasible in a Public County Hospital?

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

Antibiotics-First Versus Surgery for Appendicitis: A US Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Allowing Outpatient Antibiotic Management

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Randomized trials suggest that nonoperative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics-first is safe. No trial has evaluated outpatient treatment and no US randomized trial has been conducted, to our knowledge. This pilot study assessed feasibility of a multicenter US study comparing antibiotics-first, including outpatient management, with appendectomy.

METHODS

Patients aged 5 years or older with uncomplicated appendicitis at 1 US hospital were randomized to appendectomy or intravenous ertapenem greater than or equal to 48 hours and oral cefdinir and metronidazole. Stable antibiotics-first-treated participants older than 13 years could be discharged after greater than or equal to 6-hour emergency department (ED) observation with next-day follow-up. Outcomes included 1-month major complication rate (primary) and hospital duration, pain, disability, quality of life, and hospital charges, and antibiotics-first appendectomy rate.

RESULTS

Of 48 eligible patients, 30 (62.5%) consented, of whom 16 (53.3%) were randomized to antibiotics-first and 14 (46.7%) to appendectomy. Median age was 33 years (range 9 to 73 years), median WBC count was 15,000/μL (range 6,200 to 23,100/μL), and median computed tomography appendiceal diameter was 10 mm (range 7 to 18 mm). Of 15 antibiotic-treated adults, 14 (93.3%) were discharged from the ED and all had symptom resolution. At 1 month, major complications occurred in 2 appendectomy participants (14.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8% to 42.8%) and 1 antibiotics-first participant (6.3%; 95% CI 0.2% to 30.2%). Antibiotics-first participants had less total hospital time than appendectomy participants, 16.2 versus 42.1 hours, respectively. Antibiotics-first-treated participants had less pain and disability. During median 12-month follow-up, 2 of 15 antibiotics-first-treated participants (13.3%; 95% CI 3.7% to 37.9%) developed appendicitis and 1 was treated successfully with antibiotics; 1 had appendectomy. No more major complications occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

A multicenter US trial comparing antibiotics-first to appendectomy, including outpatient management, is feasible to evaluate efficacy and safety.

Cost Effectiveness of a Fast-Track Protocol for Urgent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies and Appendectomies

BACKGROUND

Fast-track protocols (FTPs) are used to decrease length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective outpatient procedures. Few institutions have implemented FTP for urgent procedures such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study including all patients undergoing urgent LC or LA between July 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013. Exclusion criteria included conversion to open procedure, perforated appendicitis, or procedure related to intra-abdominal injury. Analysis included a comparison of the three study groups: (1) before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation of the fast-track protocol (FTP), (2) fast-track cohort (FT) and non-fast-track cohort (NFT), and (3) those completing the fast-track pathway (FT-C) and those who began but failed to complete the pathway (FT-F).

RESULTS

There were significant reductions in LOS between all study groups compared: between PRE (n = 256) and POST (n = 472) cohorts by half a day (2.0 vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.02); between FT and NFT (0.68 vs. 1.82 days, p < 0.01); and FT-C and FT-F (0.49 vs. 1.05 days, p < 0.01). Total hospital charges were significantly reduced in FT compared with NFT ($22,347 vs. $30,868, p < 0.01) with an average savings of $8521. Total hospital charges were decreased in the FT-C compared with FT-F cohorts ($21,971 vs. $22,939, p = 0.3) with an average savings of $968. Readmissions, complications, and satisfaction were similar for all comparison groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FTPs for urgent appendectomies and cholecystectomies can significantly reduce hospital costs by reducing LOS without compromising patient outcomes.

Role of non-operative management in pediatric appendicitis

Appendectomy is currently considered the standard of care for children with acute appendicitis. Although commonly performed and considered a safe procedure, appendectomy is not without complications. Non-operative management has a role in the treatment of both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. In uncomplicated appendicitis, initial non-operative management appears to be safe, with an approximate 1-year success rate of 75%. Compared to surgery, non-operative management is associated with less disability and lower costs, with no increase in the rate of complicated appendicitis. In patients with complicated appendicitis, initial non-operative management with interval appendectomy has been shown to be safe with reported success rates between 66% and 95%. Several studies suggest that initial non-operative management with interval appendectomy may be beneficial in patients with perforated appendicitis with a well-formed abscess or inflammatory mass. Recent data suggest that interval appendectomy may not be necessary after initial non-operative management of complicated appendicitis.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Results of Immediate Discharge From Postanesthesia Care Unit to Home After Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Acute Nonperforated Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

This study examines the efficacy and safety of immediate discharge from the postanesthesia care unit after laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with acute nonperforated appendicitis.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 114 laparoscopic appendectomy cases was performed. Seventy-four patients met inclusion criteria of having uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patient demographics, operative times, length of postoperative stay, and complication rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

Only 3 of the 74 patients failed to be discharged immediately. Mean postoperative discharge time was 130.5 minutes with 86% of patients leaving within 3 hours. Delay in voiding was the most common cause of stays longer than 4 hours. Six of the 74 patients (8%) returned to the emergency room without need for readmission. There were no complications associated with the early discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate discharge from the postanesthesia care unit for patients with acute nonperforated appendicitis appears safe and effective in the community hospital setting.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Is It Time to End the Discussion?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is typically associated with inpatient hospitalization averaging between 1 and 2 days. In July 2010, a prospective protocol for outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy was adopted at our institution. Patients were dismissed from the post-anesthesia recovery room or day surgery if they met certain predefined criteria. Patients admitted to a hospital room as either full admission or observation status were considered failures of outpatient management.

STUDY DESIGN

An IRB-approved, retrospective review of a prospective database was performed on all patients having laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis from July 2010 through December 2014. Study exclusions included age younger than 17 years, pregnancy, interval appendectomy, and gangrenous or perforated appendicitis. Patient demographics, success with outpatient management, morbidity, and readmissions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis during this time frame. There were 281 men and 282 women, with a mean age of 35.5 years. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (86%) were managed as outpatients. Seventy-nine patients were admitted for pre-existing conditions (32 patients), postoperative morbidity (10 patients), physician discretion (6 patients), or lack of transportation or support at home (31 patients). Thirty-eight patients (6.7%) experienced postoperative morbidity. Seven patients (1.2%) were readmitted after outpatient management for transient fever, nausea/vomiting, migraine headache, urinary tract infection, partial small bowel obstruction, and deep venous thrombosis. There were no mortalities or reoperations. Including the readmissions, overall success with outpatient management was 85%.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed with a high rate of success, low morbidity, and low readmission rate. This protocol has withstood the test of time. Widespread adoption has the potential for substantial health care savings.

Can abdominal surgical emergencies be treated in an ambulatory setting?

INTRODUCTION

The performance of emergency abdominal surgery in an outpatient setting is increasingly the order of the day in France. This review evaluates the feasibility and reliability of ambulatory surgical treatment of the most common abdominal emergencies: appendectomy for acute appendicitis and cholecystectomy for acute complications of gallstone disease (acute cholecystitis and gallstone pancreatitis).

METHODS

This study evaluates surgical procedures performed on an ambulatory basis according to the international definition (admission in the morning, discharge in the evening with a hospital stay of less than 12 hours). Just as for elective surgery, eligibility of patients for an ambulatory approach depends on the capacities of the surgical and anesthesia team: to manage the risks, particularly the risk of deferring surgery until the morning); to prevent or treat post-operative symptoms like pain, nausea, vomiting, re-ambulation in order to permit rapid post-operative discharge.

RESULTS

Recent studies have shown that appendectomy for non-complicated acute appendicitis can be deferred for up to 12 hours without any increase in danger. Many other studies have shown that early discharge after appendectomy for acute non-complicated appendicitis is feasible and safe. Nonetheless, there is only one published series of truly ambulatory appendectomies. The results were excellent. Patients who presented in the afternoon were brought back for operation the following morning. The appropriate timing for performance of cholecystectomy in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis or gallstone pancreatitis has not been well defined, but is always somewhat delayed relative to the onset of symptoms. To minimize operative complications, cholecystectomy for acute calculous cholecystitis should probably be performed between 24 and 72 hours after diagnosis. Cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis should probably not be delayed longer than a week; the need to keep the patient hospitalized during the interval has not been demonstrated. Early discharge after cholecystectomy was usually possible, even in series where acute cholecystitis was diagnosed intra-operatively. Cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and gallstone pancreatitis seems to be feasible but no reports specifically support this approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency abdominal surgery seems to be feasible on an ambulatory setting for non-complicated acute appendicitis, acute calculous cholecystitis and gallstone pancreatitis. Only a single French series on ambulatory appendectomy for acute appendicitis has been reported.