Expanding the inclusion criteria for nonoperative management of uncomplicated appendicitis: Outcomes and cost

Conservative Management of Pediatric Patients With Appendicolith Appendicitis Versus Non-appendicolith Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Up to one-third of pediatric patients with acute appendicitis present with radiological evidence of appendicoliths. However, whether appendicolith presence influences prognosis under conservative management compared to non-appendicolith appendicitis remains uncertain.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing pediatric appendicolith and non-appendicolith appendicitis managed conservatively with antibiotics, fluids, and percutaneous drainage. Outcomes included the initial success of conservative management and recurrence rates. A random-effects model was applied for all analyses.

RESULTS

Twelve observational studies with 814 patients were included. Of these, 282 (35 %) had appendicoliths, and 532 (65 %) did not. The average age ranged from 2 to 11 years, with follow-up between 1 week and 2 years. Overall, there is no significant difference in the initial success of conservative management was observed between the two groups (OR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.28-1.78; p = 0.46). Subgroup analysis revealed lower success rates for appendicolith-associated simple appendicitis (OR 0.42; 95 % CI 0.21-0.84; p = 0.01), but no difference in complicated appendicitis (OR 1.01; 95 % CI 0.24-4.31; p = 0.99). Recurrence rates were significantly higher in appendicolith appendicitis across both groups (OR 2.75; 95 % CI 1.05-7.20; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Appendicolith presence reduces conservative management success in simple appendicitis, supporting early appendectomy. Although appendicoliths do not predict treatment failure in complicated appendicitis, interval appendectomy may be advisable due to the higher recurrence risk in both groups.

TYPE OF STUDY

Meta-analysis and systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nonoperative Management vs Upfront Laparoscopic Appendectomy for Pediatric Uncomplicated Appendicitis for 1 Year

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management (NOM) with antibiotics alone for pediatric uncomplicated appendicitis is accepted to be safe and effective. However, the relative cost-effectiveness of this approach compared with appendectomy remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nonoperative vs operative management for pediatric uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

A trial-based real-world economic evaluation from the healthcare sector perspective was performed using data collected from a multi-institutional nonrandomized controlled trial investigating NOM vs surgery. The time horizon was 1 year, with costs in 2023 US dollars. Ratio of costs-to-charges-based data for the initial hospitalization, readmissions, and unplanned emergency department visits were extracted from the Pediatric Health Information System. Utility data were derived from patient-reported disability days and health-related quality-of-life scores. Multiple scenarios and 1-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses accounted for parameter uncertainty. Willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) or disability-adjusted life year. Primary outcome measures included total and incremental mean costs, QALY, disability-adjusted life year, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

Of 1,068 participants, 370 (35%) selected NOM and 698 (65%) selected urgent laparoscopic appendectomy. Operative management cost an average of $9,791 per patient and yielded an average of 0.884 QALYs, whereas NOM cost an average of $8,044 per patient and yielded an average of 0.895 QALYs. NOM was both less costly and more effective in base case and scenario analyses using disability days and alternate methods of calculating uses.

CONCLUSIONS

NOM is cost-effective compared with laparoscopic appendectomy for pediatric uncomplicated appendicitis for 1 year.

Diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains controversial. This systematic review details the evidence and current best practices for the evaluation and management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in adults and children.

METHODS

Eight questions regarding the diagnosis and management of appendicitis were formulated. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov/NLM were queried for articles published from 2010 to 2022 with key words related to at least one question. Randomized and non-randomized studies were included. Two reviewers screened each publication for eligibility and then extracted data from eligible studies. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on all quantitative data. The quality of randomized and non-randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 or Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively.

RESULTS

2792 studies were screened and 261 were included. Most had a high risk of bias. Computerized tomography scan yielded the highest sensitivity (> 80%) and specificity (> 93%) in the adult population, although high variability existed. In adults with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management resulted in higher odds of readmission (OR 6.10) and need for operation (OR 20.09), but less time to return to work/school (SMD - 1.78). In pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management also resulted in higher odds of need for operation (OR 38.31). In adult patients with complicated appendicitis, there were higher odds of need for operation following antibiotic treatment only (OR 29.00), while pediatric patients had higher odds of abscess formation (OR 2.23). In pediatric patients undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, higher risk of reoperation at any time point was observed in patients who had drains placed at the time of operation (RR 2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains nuanced. A personalized approach and appropriate patient selection remain key to treatment success. Further research on controversies in treatment would be useful for optimal management.

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.

Comparación de la seguridad y la eficacia del uso de antibióticos frente a la apendicectomía en el tratamiento de la apendicitis no complicada en adultos. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis

Introducción. La apendicitis aguda es una emergencia quirúrgica frecuente, en la cual el tratamiento de tipo conservador basado en antibióticos se ha identificado como una opción terapéutica que necesita seguir siendo estudiada. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar las diferencias en seguridad y eficacia del uso de antibióticos en comparación con la apendicectomía en adultos con apendicitis no complicada. Métodos. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis. Se encontraron 452 estudios; después de una selección, 45 se evaluaron en texto completo y 15 para calidad metodológica; 11 estudios fueron seleccionados y 9 incluidos en el metaanálisis. Resultados. Se contó con 3186 participantes, de los cuales 1512 fueron tratados con terapia antibiótica y 1674 sometidos a apendicectomía. Se identificó estancia hospitalaria más corta en los pacientes sometidos a apendicectomía (SMD: 0,28; IC95%: 0,14 a 0,41). Para los pacientes tratados con terapia antibiótica, se evidenció puntajes de riesgo menores en las escalas de diagnóstico de apendicitis (SMD: -0,13; IC95%: -0,22 a -0,04), menor éxito terapéutico en un 16 % (RR: 0,84; IC95%: 0,77 a 0,92) y reducción del riesgo de complicaciones del 63 % (RR: 0,37; IC95%: 0,25 a 0,53). Se encontró alta heterogeneidad y riesgo de sesgo de publicación. Conclusiones. La terapia antibiótica necesita mayor evidencia para desenlaces como calidad de vida, satisfacción, dolor, o complicaciones específicas, entre otros, que permitan hacer comparaciones más contundentes. Los pacientes que consideren el manejo conservador necesitan ser adecuadamente asesorados y monitorizados para optimizar sus posibilidades de resultados favorables y la oportuna identificación de complicaciones que necesiten de otros abordajes.

A Systematic Review Comparing Nonoperative Management to Appendectomy for Uncomplicated Appendicitis in Children

More than a century after its introduction, appendectomy has remained the gold standard treatment for acute appendicitis. In adults with acute uncomplicated appendicitis, nonoperative management (NOM) has been shown to be a viable treatment option. To date, there has been relatively limited data on the nonoperative management of acute appendicitis in the pediatric population. The primary objective of this study was to systematically review the available literature in the pediatric population and compare the efficacy and recurrence between initial nonoperative treatment strategy and appendectomy in children with uncomplicated appendicitis. In July 2021, we conducted systematic searches of the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. We only included full-text comparative original studies published within the last decade, and we excluded articles that solely examined NOM without comparing it to appendectomy. Two writers worked independently on the data collection and analysis. It was found that NOM had a high initial success rate and a low rate of recurrent appendicitis. After months of follow-up, the vast majority of patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis who received initial nonoperative treatment did not require surgical intervention. Furthermore, the rate of complication was comparable in both treatment groups, and NOM did not appear to be associated with an increased risk of complications. The most significant drawback stemmed from the fact that the included articles in this study had a wide range of study designs and inclusion criteria. According to current evidence, NOM is feasible and cost-effective. Antibiotic therapy can be given safely in a small subset of individuals with uncomplicated appendicitis. To optimize outcomes, physicians should evaluate the clinical presentation and the patient's desire when selecting those to be managed nonoperatively. Again, more research, preferably large randomized trials, is required to compare the long-term clinical efficacy of NOM with appendicectomy. Finally, additional research is required to establish the characteristics of patients who are the best candidates for nonoperative treatment.

Analysis of treatment success with new inclusion criteria for antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis: A multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conservative antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis is debated because of the unproven criteria for use and relatively high failure rate. We developed inclusion criteria to optimize antibiotic therapy use and compared the success rate to that seen in previous literature.

METHODS

Our antibiotic therapy inclusion criteria were developed based on clinical findings (symptom onset ≤48 hours and body temperature ≤38.3℃), laboratory parameters (white blood cell count ≤12000/mL) and radiologic findings (appendiceal diameter ≤12 mm and no appendicolith). Patients who met inclusion criteria were enrolled from three hospitals between 2016 and 2017. Treatment success was defined as a response to antibiotic therapy and no recurrent symptoms within 1 year. We compared our success rate with previous clinical trial success rates.

RESULTS

There were 240 patients enrolled (116 men and 124 women) with a mean age of 38.7 years. After initial antibiotic treatment, 233 patients (97.1%) responded to therapy and were discharged. There were no post-treatment complications with Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III. During the 1-year follow-up period, the treatment success rate was 88.8% (213/240) and the recurrence rate was 8.6% (20/233; 15 underwent surgery and 5 received antibiotics again). In contrast, the combined treatment success rate for six previous clinical trials was 76.5% (573/749) and the recurrence rate was 21.6% (157/727).

CONCLUSIONS

The group enrolled with the new inclusion criteria showed an improved treatment success rate compared to previous studies. These criteria will aid in determining optimal conservative treatment use in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis.

Conservative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis in children: the CONTRACT feasibility study, including feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Although non-operative treatment is known to be effective for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, randomised trial data comparing important outcomes of non-operative treatment with those of appendicectomy are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children.

DESIGN

This was a mixed-methods study, which included a feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded and parallel qualitative and survey studies, a parallel health economic feasibility study and the development of a core outcome set.

SETTING

This study was set in three specialist NHS paediatric surgical units in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Children (aged 4-15 years) clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis participated in the feasibility randomised controlled trial. Children, their families, recruiting clinicians and other health-care professionals involved in caring for children with appendicitis took part in the qualitative study. UK specialist paediatric surgeons took part in the survey. Specialist paediatric surgeons, adult general surgeons who treat children, and children and young people who previously had appendicitis, along with their families, took part in the development of the core outcome set.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants in the feasibility randomised controlled trial were randomised to a non-operative treatment pathway (broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation) or appendicectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited to the feasibility trial.

DATA SOURCES

Data were sourced from NHS case notes, questionnaire responses, transcribed audio-recordings of recruitment discussions and qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Overall, 50% (95% confidence interval 40% to 59%) of 115 eligible patients approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. There was high acceptance of randomisation and good adherence to trial procedures and follow-up (follow-up rates of 89%, 85% and 85% at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, respectively). More participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated. Qualitative work enabled us to communicate about the trial effectively with patients and families, to design and deliver bespoke training to optimise recruitment and to understand how to optimise the design and delivery of a future trial. The health economic study indicated that the main cost drivers are the ward stay cost and the cost of the operation; it has also informed quality-of-life assessment methods for future work. A core outcome set for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people was developed, containing 14 outcomes. There is adequate surgeon interest to justify proceeding to an effectiveness trial, with 51% of those surveyed expressing a willingness to recruit with an unchanged trial protocol.

LIMITATIONS

Because the feasibility randomised controlled trial was performed in only three centres, successful recruitment across a larger number of sites cannot be guaranteed. However, the qualitative work has informed a bespoke training package to facilitate this. Although survey results suggest adequate clinician interest to make a larger trial possible, actual participation may differ, and equipoise may have changed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

A future effectiveness trial is feasible, following limited additional preparation, to establish appropriate outcome measures and case identification. It is recommended to include a limited package of qualitative work to optimise recruitment, in particular at new centres.

FUTURE WORK

Prior to proceeding to an effectiveness trial, there is a need to develop a robust method for distinguishing children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from those with more advanced appendicitis, and to reach agreement on a primary outcome measure and effect size that is acceptable to all stakeholder groups involved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

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.

Appendectomy or Not? An Update on the Evidence for Antibiotics Only Versus Surgery for the Treatment of Acute Appendicitis in Children

Appendicitis is a common diagnosis in children being evaluated in the emergency department. After diagnosis, standard treatment has been surgical appendectomy; however, in recent years there is a growing body of evidence evaluating the possibility of nonoperative management in both children and adults. This review will present the current state of the pediatric literature that suggests patients may be successfully treated with antibiotics alone (ie, without surgery), but that a proportion of these patients will have recurrent appendicitis. Given that the literature regarding the option of antibiotic-only management compared with surgery is not yet definitive, there are many factors for providers to discuss with families and patients when considering treatment for acute appendicitis.

Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

METHODS

This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

Nonoperative treatment for nonperforated appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis in children is an alternative to appendectomy. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the outcomes of nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis in children in the literature. Databases were searched to identify abstracts, using predefined search terms. The abstracts were reviewed by two independent reviewers and articles were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted by the two reviewers and analyzed. The literature search yielded 2743 abstracts. Twenty-one articles were selected for analysis. The study design was heterogenous, with only one randomized controlled study. The symptoms resolved in 92% [95% CI (88; 96)] of the nonoperatively treated patients. Meta-analysis showed that an additional 16% (95% CI 10; 22) of patients underwent appendectomy after discharge from initial hospital stay. Complications and length of hospital stay was not different among patients treated with antibiotics compared with those who underwent appendectomy. Nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis children is safe and efficient. There is a lack of large randomized controlled trials to compare outcomes of nonoperative treatment with appendectomy.

Perforation in pediatric non-complicated appendicitis treated by antibiotics: the real incidence

PURPOSE

The incidence of perforation during antibiotic therapy (AT) of children triaged as non-complicated acute appendicitis (NC-Ap) was investigated.

METHODS

Abdominal ultrasonography (US) and/or computed tomography (CT) scans from cases of perforation identified at appendectomy for failed AT were reassessed blindly by a panel of board-certified specialists for any evidence of pre-AT morbidity suggestive of perforation.

RESULTS

Of 521 cases triaged as NC-Ap, symptoms resolved with AT in 452 cases (86.8%). All 69/521 (13.2%) cases with persistent symptoms had urgent appendectomy, and 12/521 (2.3%) were found to have perforated. Blind reassessment of US and/or CT scans from these cases identified seven with evidence of perforation when they were triaged as NC-Ap. Thus, the actual incidence of perforation during AT for NC-Ap was actually 12-7 = 5/521 (0.95%).

CONCLUSIONS

Perforation is generally believed to be a complication of AT, but inappropriate triaging of cases for AT can bias results by artificially inflating the number of perforations, in this study, by more than double. We are the first to assess the unbiased incidence of perforation during AT for NC-Ap, by reassessing pre-AT US and/or CT scans. The incidence of perforation during AT is actually negligible.

Preoperative assessment of complicated appendicitis through stress reaction and clinical manifestations

This study assessed the severity of the disease through the preoperative clinical manifestations and inflammatory reaction indicators of acute appendicitis, and established a score table to predict complicated appendicitis (CA).The clinical data of 238 patients with acute appendicitis in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed, which included 18 patients with acute simple appendicitis (7.6%), 170 patients with acute purulent appendicitis (72.0%), and 48 patients with acute gangrene and perforation (20.3%). The clinical manifestations and inflammatory reaction indicators were analyzed by univariate logistic regression. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to screen out the independent risk factors of CA. The β coefficients of independent risk factors entering the multivariate model were assigned by rounding, and the total score was the sum of values of all factors. Finally, verification and analysis were performed for the predictive model, and the operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve was drawn. Then, the area under the curve (AUC) was compared with the THRIVE scale, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow method was used to evaluate whether the model fitted well.The multivariate logistic regression analysis of independent risk factors was performed, and the values were rounded to the variable assignment based on the β coefficient values. The plotted ROC and AUC was calculated as 0.857 (P < .001). Using the Hosmer-Lemeshow method, the X-value was 12.430, suggesting that the prediction model fitted well.The scoring system can quickly determine whether this is a CA, allowing for an earlier and correct diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, the scoring system was convenient, economical, and affordable. Moreover, it is easy to popularized and promote.

Methods of conservative antibiotic treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses and a recent guideline acknowledge that conservative management of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics can be successful for patients who wish to avoid surgery. However, guidance as to specific management does not exist.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE search of trials describing methods of conservative treatment was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies involving 2,944 antibiotic-treated participants were identified. The greatest experience with conservative treatment is in persons 5 to 50 years of age. In most trials, imaging was used to confirm localized appendicitis without evidence of abscess, phlegmon, or tumor. Antibiotics regimens were generally consistent with intra-abdominal infection treatment guidelines and used for a total of 7 to 10 days. Approaches ranged from 3-day hospitalization on parenteral agents to same-day hospital or ED discharge of stable patients with outpatient oral antibiotics. Minimum time allowed before response was evaluated varied from 8 to 72 hours. Although pain was a common criterion for nonresponse and appendectomy, analgesic regimens were poorly described. Trials differed in use of other response indicators, that is, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and reimaging. Diet ranged from restriction for 48 hours to as tolerated. Initial response rates were generally greater than 90% and most participants improved by 24 to 48 hours, with no related severe sepsis or deaths. In most studies, appendectomy was recommended for recurrence; however, in several, patients had antibiotic retreatment with success.

CONCLUSION

While further investigation of conservative treatment is ongoing, patients considering this approach should be advised and managed according to study methods and related guidelines to promote informed shared decision-making and optimize their chance of similar outcomes as described in published trials. Future studies that address biases associated with enrollment and response evaluation, employ best-practice pain control and antibiotic selection, better define cancer risk, and explore longer time thresholds for response, minimized diet restriction and hospital stays, and antibiotic re-treatment will further our understanding of the potential effectiveness of conservative management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level II.

Disease burden of appendectomy for appendicitis: a population-based cohort study

Background

Few large-scale epidemiologic studies evaluate the clinical and economic burden of appendicitis. These data may impact future research and treatment strategies. In this study, the objective was to determine the burden of appendectomy for appendicitis in terms of incidence rates, length of hospital stay (LOS) and hospital costs on a national level. In addition, outcomes were compared for subgroups based on surgical treatment, age and hospital setting.

Methods

Observational retrospective population-based cohort study using the national Dutch healthcare reimbursement registry, which covers hospital registration and reimbursement for 17 million inhabitants. Patients with a diagnosis of appendicitis who underwent appendectomy between 2006 and 2016 were included. Primary outcomes were incidence rates, LOS and hospital costs.

Results

A total of 135,025 patients were included. Some 53% of patients was male, and 64% was treated in a general hospital. The overall incidence rate of appendectomy was 81 per 100,000 inhabitants and showed a significant decreasing trend across time and age. Mean ± SD LOS per patient was 3.66 ± 3.5 days. LOS showed a significant increase with age and was significantly longer for open versus minimally invasive appendectomy. Mean ± SD hospital costs per patient were €3700 ± 1284. Costs were initially lower for open compared to minimally invasive appendectomy, but were similar from 2012 onward. Compared to non-university hospitals, patients treated in university hospitals had a significantly longer LOS and higher costs.

Conclusions

Appendectomy for appendicitis represents a substantial clinical and economic burden in the Netherlands. A preference for minimally invasive technique seems justified.

Clinical Management of Appendicitis

Background

Ever since the first appendectomy has been performed, surgery has been the standard of care for acute appendicitis, with antibiotic therapy being reserved for special situations. Recent studies have shown the feasibility of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis.

Methods

This clinical therapeutic review is based both on author expertise and a selective literature survey in PubMed based on the term 'appendicitis', combined with the terms 'acute', 'complicated', 'conservative', 'non-operative', 'therapy', 'surgery', and 'strategy'. According to these search results as well as to the treatment guidelines from the American College of Surgeons, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, European Association of Endoscopic Surgery, and World Society of Emergency Surgery, we present an interdisciplinary treatment concept.

Results

Approximately 90% of patients treated with antibiotics are able to avoid surgery during the initial admission. The other 10% that fail to respond to antibiotics require a rescue appendectomy. Recurrence rates of non-operated patients within 1 year are as high as 20-30%.

Conclusion

In uncomplicated appendicitis without risk factors for failure of non-operative management, a shared decision based on the patient's preferences should be made. In cases with risk factors, appendectomy is still the treatment recommended. If the diagnosis is uncertain or clinical symptoms are rather mild, antibiotic therapy should be started. In complicated appendicitis, management depends on the clinical state, with either immediate surgery or primarily antibiotic therapy and combined with drainage of abscess, being followed by interval appendectomy in some cases.