Peut-on traiter une appendicite aiguë par des antibiotiques et dans quelles conditions ?

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

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

Meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of antibiotic versus appendicectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis

Appendicectomy has been the gold standard treatment of acute appendicitis for more than a century, while nonoperative therapies, including antibiotics, have acquired increased interest in recent years. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of antibiotics versus appendicectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis. Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases were searched. Prospective randomized controlled trials that compared antibiotic treatment with surgery were included. The outcomes evaluated included the time of hospital stay, complications and time to work. There were no statistically significant differences between the antibiotic and appendicectomy groups with regard to the time of hospital stay and complications. However, the time to work was significantly longer in the appendicectomy group when compared with the antibiotic group. In addition, the therapeutic effects of antibiotics and appendicectomy were comparable for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Antibiotics as first-line therapy for acute appendicitis: evidence for a change in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Randomized studies have indicated that acute appendicitis may be treated by antibiotics without the need of surgery. However, concerns have been raised about selection bias of patients in such studies. Therefore, the present study was aimed to validate previous findings in randomized studies by a full-scale population-based application.

METHODS

All patients with acute appendicitis at Sahlgrenska University Hospital (May 2009 and February 2010) were offered intravenous piperacillin plus tazobactam according to our previous experience, followed by 9 days out-hospital oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole. Endpoints were treatment efficacy and complications. Efficient antibiotic treatment was defined as recovery without the need of surgery beyond 1 year of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 558 consecutive patients were hospitalized and treated due to acute appendicitis. Seventy-nine percent (n = 442) received antibiotics as first-line therapy and 20 % (n = 111) had primary surgery as the second-line therapy. Seventy-seven percent of patients on primary antibiotics recovered while 23 % (n = 100) had subsequent appendectomy due to failed initial treatment on antibiotics. Thirty-eight patients (11 %) of the 342 had experienced recurrent appendicitis at 1-year follow-up. Primary antibiotic treatment had fewer complications compared to primary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based study confirms previous results of randomized studies. Antibiotic treatment can be offered as the first-line therapy to a majority of unselected patients with acute appendicitis without medical drawbacks other than the unknown risk for long-term relapse, which must be weighed against the unpredicted but well-known risk for serious major complications following surgical intervention.