The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnancy

The risk of preterm delivery after appendectomy during pregnancy is higher in the face of a negative appendectomy

BACKGROUND

Reported outcomes after appendectomy during pregnancy remain inconclusive, and the risk for preterm delivery is not necessarily procedure-related.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 185 pregnant women who underwent appendectomy during pregnancy and gave birth between 2005 and 2022, compared using a 3:1 ratio to 555 parturients who did not undergo surgery. clinical, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendectomy was the most common procedure (117/185; 63.2 ​%) whereas 68/185 (36.8 ​%) had open appendectomy. Pathological findings revealed that 141/185 cases (76.2 ​%) had an inflamed appendix, while 44/185 (23.8 ​%) were classified as having a "white appendix" (negative appendectomy). Preterm delivery occurred more frequently in the appendectomy group [22/185 (11.9 ​%) vs 30/555 (5.4 ​%), p ​= ​0.003] with even higher incidence in negative appendectomies compared to inflamed appendix cases [9/44 (20.5 ​%) vs 13/141 (9.2 ​%), p ​= ​0.044]. Multivariate analysis identified appendectomy (but not an inflamed appendix) as the sole significant risk factor for preterm birth (odds ratio 2.3, CI 1.26-4.15, p ​= ​0.006).

CONCLUSION

Preterm delivery correlates with negative appendectomies. Careful assessment is essential to avoid unnecessary surgical interventions during pregnancy.

CAR/CETARS/CSAR Practice Guideline on Imaging the Adult Patient With Right Lower Quadrant Pain

In 2023, the Canadian Society of Abdominal Radiology (CSAR) and Canadian Emergency, Trauma, and Acute Care Radiology Society (CETARS) received Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) member feedback that there was an unmet educational need for guidance in the imaging investigation of right lower quadrant (RLQ) pain. Members requested specific guidance on how to handle controversial scenarios including which test to order when, specifics of imaging protocols, and managing pregnant patients who have RLQ pain-all from a Canadian perspective. After conducting an exhaustive literature review, the working group agreed that a Canadian-specific set of guidelines was warranted. The management recommendations presented in this guideline were discussed as a group to achieve expert consensus. As the workup for RLQ pain can vary considerably in the paediatric population, the scope of this paper was restricted to adults (18 years of age or older). Whenever possible, the best evidence was used to inform the clinical guidance, and where gaps existed, the guidelines reflect consensus among experts in the field. The result is a framework to aid in this process of managing patients with RLQ pain across various clinical scenarios while addressing current questions and controversies, particularly those most relevant to the Canadian healthcare system.

Validation of the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score during pregnancy: A nested case-control study

OBJECTIVES

Appendicitis poses diagnostic challenges. A correct diagnosis is important during pregnancy to avoid unnecessary surgery on the one hand and delayed surgery on the other hand, as both may negatively affect pregnancy outcomes. Clinical scores for risk-stratified management of suspected appendicitis are well established in adults but have not been validated during pregnancy. This nested case-control study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score and imaging during pregnancy.

METHODS

By cross-linking national Swedish health registries from a defined geographical area, we identified a cohort of 154 women who underwent appendectomy for suspected appendicitis during pregnancy and a matched cohort of 232 pregnant women admitted for acute abdominal pain and suspected appendicitis but with a discharge diagnosis of nonspecific abdominal pain (NSAP). All variables were extracted from medical records. The diagnostic value of AIR score and imaging was estimated for patients with a final diagnosis of appendicitis compared with patients with negative appendectomy and NSAP patients.

RESULTS

The final diagnoses for the operated patients were uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in 49.4% and 26.6%, respectively, and negative appendectomy in 24.0%. Nearly half of all the patients underwent diagnostic imaging (41%), mainly by ultrasonography. The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic imaging were 44.9% (95% CI 32.9%-57.4%) and 42.2% (95% CI 31.9%-53.1%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of AIR score was 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.92) for all appendicitis and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.95) for complicated appendicitis. The sensitivity for complicated appendicitis was 100% at a score of ≥4. The specificity for all appendicitis was 97% at a score of ≥9.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that the AIR score may be a suitable diagnostic tool for risk stratification of pregnant women with abdominal pain and suspected appendicitis but further validation among pregnant women is needed.

Diagnostic value of systemic immune inflammation index in acute appendicitis and complicated appendicitis in pregnant patients

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain in the right lower quadrant during pregnancy is difficult to approach and acute appendicitis must be excluded. The complication rate in pregnant acute appendicitis increases as a result of delayed diagnosis due to physiological and anatomic changes. The systemic immune inflammatory index (SII), which includes several inflammatory tests, is considered to be a good indicator of acute inflammation. The aim of the present study was to investigate the diagnostic value of SII in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and complicated appendicitis in pregnant women.

MATERIAL-METHOD

This was designed as a retrospective, single-center case-control study. This study was performed in pregnant women over 12 weeks of gestation who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis as indicated by pathology report and met the inclusion criteria. Vital parameters, demographic characteristics, laboratory values, presence of complicated appendicitis, and pathology reports were taken into analysis.

RESULTS

The present study was performed with 76 pregnant women, including 38 pregnant women with acute appendicitis and 38 pregnant women with healthy controls. SII had a sensitivity of 82.0% and specificity of 66.7% with a cut-off value of 840.13 in pregnant acute appendicitis cases (AUC: 0.790; 95% CI: 0.686-0.984; p < 0.001) and SII level was significantly higher in complicated appendicitis cases with a sensitivity and specificity of 66.7% and 91.3%, respectively, with a cut-off value of 2301.66 (AUC: 0.812; 95% CI: 0.665-0.958; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

SII is a cost-effective, rapid, easily calculated, and powerful marker that can be used for the diagnosis of both acute and complicated appendicitis in pregnant patients.

Case report: A rare cause of intestinal perforation in a third-trimester pregnant woman

Background

An acute abdomen is a medical emergency that requires early diagnosis and treatment. In pregnancy, this process is significantly more challenging, and radiological findings are sometimes unclear due to the enlarged uterus displacing other structures. Moreover, endometriosis-related complications are rare, and the disease is often undiagnosed.

Case presentation

We report a case of acute perforation of the cecum and appendix during pregnancy (35 weeks of gestation) caused by a previously unknown, deep infiltrating endometriosis with focal ulceration of the affected bowel wall, which sonographically seemed to be acute appendicitis.

Conclusion

Despite the relatively low risk, clinicians should be aware of possible endometriosis-associated complications in pregnancy with potentially life-threatening events, even in previously unknown endometriosis. Further studies should evaluate intestinal complications during pregnancy in relation to previous treatment of intestinal endometriosis (conservative vs. surgical).

Appendicitis in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography

OBJECTIVES

The accuracy of ultrasound in the detection of appendicitis in pregnant women was examined in a meta-analysis.

METHODS

Pregnant women with suspected acute appendicitis were evaluated using ultrasound in a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1, 2011 to August 10, 2023. The sensitivity and specificity values and diagnostic odds ratios were obtained using the pooled data.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were studied in four relevant investigations. Ultrasonography has a sensitivity of 56% and a specificity of 88% for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.66%. Ultrasonography had a positive likelihood ratio of 4.65 (95% confidence interval, 1.42-15.23) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.62). There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound has moderate sensitivity for identifying appendicitis in pregnant women and may be utilized as an alternative diagnostic method.

Antibiotic versus surgery in the treatment of acute appendicitis in the pregnant population: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in pregnant women. There has been a wide variance in clinical practice worldwide, with some favoring an antibiotic-only approach while others prefer surgery as the first-line management. Therefore, we designed the current analysis to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of antibiotics versus surgery management. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, EuropePMC, and Cochrane Central from March 4, 1904 until November 25, 2022, to look for studies comparing antibiotics and surgery in pregnant patients with acute appendicitis. We only included studies that provided a comparison between the two treatments. We included preterm delivery, fetal loss, maternal death, and complications as outcomes. The results were compared using an odds ratio and 95% confidence interval. We also performed a sensitivity analysis by excluding studies with a serious risk of bias. Results: We included five non-randomized studies for the analysis. We found that patients in the antibiotic group had a lower risk of preterm labor (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.92]; p 0.02) but a higher risk of complications (OR 1.79 [95% CI 1.19-2.69]; p 0.005). We did not find any difference in the other outcomes. Conclusion: The increased risk of complications should caution clinicians about using antibiotics as the first-line management. More studies are required to identify patients who would benefit the most before antibiotics could be adopted as a treatment for acute appendicitis in pregnant patients.

Accuracy of Point-of-care Ultrasound in Diagnosing Acute Appendicitis During Pregnancy

Introduction: Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetrical surgical emergency in pregnancy. Ultrasound is the imaging tool of choice, but its use is complicated due to anatomical changes during pregnancy and depends on the clinician’s expertise. In this study, our aim was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in suspected appendicitis in pregnant women. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all pregnant women undergoing POCUS for suspected appendicitis between June 2010–June 2020 in a tertiary emergency department. The primary outcome was to establish sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios of POCUS in diagnosing acute appendicitis, overall and for each trimester. We used histology of the appendix as the reference standard in case of surgery. If appendectomy was not performed, the clinical course until childbirth was used to rule out appendicitis. If the patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we compared readings to POCUS. Results: A total of 61 women were included in the study, of whom 34 (55.7%) underwent appendectomy and in 30 (49.2%) an acute appendicitis was histopathologically confirmed. Sensitivity of POCUS was 66.7% (confidence interval [CI] 95% 47.1-82.7), specificity 96.8% (CI 95% 83.3-99.9), and positive likelihood ratio 20.7. Performance of POCUS was comparable in all trimesters, with highest sensitivity in the first trimester (72.7%). The MRI reading showed a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 100%. In the four negative appendectomies a MRI was not performed. Conclusion: Point-of-care ultrasound showed a high specificity and positive likelihood ratio in diagnosing acute appendicitis in pregnant women in all trimesters with suspected appendicitis. In negative (or inconclusive) cases further imaging as MRI could be helpful to avoid negative appendectomy.

Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in diagnosing acute appendicitis in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lack of timely diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) can lead to perforation and peritonitis, which might be associated with complications such as miscarriage, preterm delivery, fetal loss, and even maternal mortality. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the accuracy of ultrasonography (US) for diagnosing AA in pregnant patients.

METHODS

We performed the present systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Using a pre-designed standard datasheet, the two authors summarized the data of each study independently. Pregnant women with diagnosed or suspected AA, who have undergone ultrasonography, as well as using CT scan or surgery as the standard method, were included.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies consisting of 1593 patients were included. The main analysis showed that the overall sensitivity and specificity were 77.6% and 75.3% for US in diagnosing AA in pregnancy. The sensitivity of US in the first, second, and third trimesters of pregnancy were 69%, 63%, and 51%, respectively. While the corresponding figures for specificity were 85%, 85%, and 65%. There was a significant difference in the diagnostic performance of US between the first two trimesters and the third one. The DORs in these three trimesters were 36, 26, and 1.92, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound evaluation showed a low diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis in pregnant women, especially during the third trimester. These patients should be diagnosed early and accurately to prevent both complications and unnecessary operations. It can be recommended to consider alternative imaging, mostly after negative or uncertain US.

The diagnostic role of hemogram parameters in pregnant appendicitis

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most frequently encountered non-obstetric disease requiring surgical intervention during pregnancy. Early diagnosis reduces maternal and fetal morbidity / mortality rates. Aim: This study aims to investigate hemogram parameters in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women. Material and Methods: A retrospective case-controlled study was conducted in three groups. Thirty-nine pregnant patients with acute appendicitis (Group A), 39 fertile nonpregnant patients with acute appendicitis (Group B), and 39 healthy pregnant women (Group C) were included in the study. WBC, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, NLR, PLR, MPV and RDW values were compared. Results: The mean NLR values in group A, group B and group C were 7.39 (1.58–46.6), 5.66 (1–20) and 4.23 (1.54–10.77) respectively, and there was a significant difference in NLR values between the groups (P= 0.002). The mean PLR values in group A, group B and group C were 159.09 (69.1–574), 134.28 (21.5-360) and 120 (68.7–334) and difference was statistically significant (P= 0.019). Cutoff points for WBC count was 14155 106/μL (51,3% sensitivity, 82,1% specificity), for neutrophil count is 10955 106/μL (53,8% sensitivity, 84,6% specificity), for NLR is 9.23 (46,2% sensitivity, 92,3% specificity) and PLR is 157,6 (51,3% sensitivity and 82,1% specificity) NLR had largest area under the curve with 0.667 NLR. Conclusion: Neutrophil count, WBC and PLR were found to be the most valuable inflammatory parameters however, RDW, Lymphocyte count, and MPV levels are not found valuable markers in terms of sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients by this study.

Acute Appendicitis During Pregnancy: A Case Series of 42 Pregnant Women

Introduction It is difficult to diagnose the symptoms of acute appendicitis in pregnant women due to its similarities with pregnancy physiology. In this study, we examined the diagnostic value of laboratory parameters in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women. Material and methods Forty-two patients who underwent appendectomy during pregnancy were evaluated. The demographic characteristics, laboratory parameters and imaging methods of the patients were examined. According to the pathology results, the patients were evaluated in two groups as normal appendix and acute appendicitis. In addition, a non-pregnant control group was formed to compare the results between the pregnant and control groups. Results The mean age of the 42 patients was 30±6 years, and the pathology results were evaluated as normal in 16 (38.1%) of the patients. As imaging methods, ultrasonography was undertaken in all patients, with MRI being additionally performed in two patients. When the normal appendix and acute appendicitis groups were compared, no significant difference was observed in terms of laboratory parameters (neutrophil, lymphocyte, white blood cell and platelet counts, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, mean thrombocyte volume, red cell distribution width, and pregnancy trimesters (P>0.05). The group that had undergone appendectomy had a significantly higher rate of negative appendectomy compared to the control group (P=0.001). Conclusion Laboratory parameters alone cannot be sufficient for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients. If clinical examination, laboratory parameters and USG are not sufficient for diagnosis, MRI is the imaging method that should be considered to reduce negative appendectomy rate.

Trends in Appendicitis Among Pregnant Women, the Risk for Cardiac Arrest, and Maternal-Fetal Mortality

Background

Appendicitis is the most common extra-uterine surgical emergency requiring immediate intervention during pregnancy. However, risks for mortality and morbidity among pregnant women with appendicitis remain poorly understood. This study was conducted to determine the temporal trends of appendicitis in pregnant women, and to calculate the risk of maternal–fetal mortality and near-miss marker (i.e., cardiac arrest) among pregnant women in general, and by race/ethnicity.

Methods

We conducted this retrospective study using data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2015. Joinpoint regression was used to estimate and describe temporal changes in the rates of all and acute appendicitis during the 14-year study period. We also estimated the risk of cardiac arrest, maternal, and fetal mortality among mothers of various racial/ethnic groups with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Within each group, patients without acute appendicitis were the referent category.

Results and conclusions

Out of the 58 million pregnancy hospitalizations during the study period, 63,145 cases (10.74 per 10,000 hospitalizations) were for acute appendicitis. There was a 5% decline (95% CI: − 5.1, − 5.0) in the rate of appendicitis hospitalizations over the period of the study. After adjusting for covariates, pregnant mothers with acute appendicitis had increased likelihood when compared to those without acute appendicitis to suffer fetal loss (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.85–2.28) and nearly fivefold increase for inpatient maternal death. In conclusion, appendicitis during pregnancy remains an important cause of in-hospital maternal–fetal mortality overall and regardless of race/ethnicity.

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.

Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy - an eleven-year retrospective analysis

Background

Diagnosis and management of non-obstetric abdominal pathologies during pregnancy are clinically challenging for both obstetricians and general surgeons. Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of pregnant patients who had undergone non-obstetric abdominal surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 76 pregnant patients who had required surgery for non-obstetric abdominal pathologies during pregnancy at our department from January 2005 to December 2015. Data were collected retrospectively from medical records as well as from our institutional perinatal database. We evaluated data for clinical presentation, perioperative management, preterm labor, and maternal and fetal outcomes.

Results

The patients’ mean age was 29 (interquartile range IQR 25–33) years. Indications for surgery were acute appendicitis in 63%, adnexal pathology in 11%, cholecystolithiasis in 5% and other indications in 21%; surgery was performed in an elective setting in 18% and in an emergent/urgent setting in 82%. In five cases, complications, three of them oncological, called for further surgery. Ninety-seven percent of operations were conducted under general anesthesia. Median skin-to-skin time was 50 (37–80) minutes, median in-hospital stay was 4 (3.5–6) days, and 5 % required postoperative intensive care. Preterm labor occurred in 15%, miscarriage in 7% (none of them directly related to abdominal surgery).

Conclusion

Abdominal surgery for non-obstetric pathology during pregnancy can be performed safely, if mandatory, without increases in maternal and fetal pathology, miscarriage, and preterm birth rates.