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

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

ABSTRACT

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

Misses and Near Misses in Paediatric Appendicitis: An Eight-Year, Single-Centre Retrospective Review

AIM

Diagnostic error can result in the appendectomy of a normal appendix, commonly known as negative appendectomy (NA). Missed appendicitis (MA) is related to a poor outcome. The aim of this study was to determine whether there are factors in presentation associated with NA or MA.

METHODS

This is a single-centre, retrospective chart review of histology-confirmed appendicitis over an eight-year period. We defined MA as appendicitis diagnosed within the week of a paediatric emergency department discharge for a similar presentation. Negative appendectomy was defined as a histologic examination of the appendix that lacked signs of inflammation.

RESULTS

A total of 845 children had appendicitis on pathologic examination. NA included 69 children, and MA 29 children. Inflammatory markers were lower for children with NA than for children with appendicitis, and children with NA were less likely to undergo CT. Almost half of the children with MA were discharged without laboratory evaluation, and almost three quarters were discharged without imaging evaluation. Half of the children with MA returned with complicated appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

Increased rates of laboratory and/or imaging evaluations in patients with abdominal pain or non-classic gastroenteritis, along with observation or early follow-up, may decrease MA. More frequent use of ultrasound and MRI may keep the NA rate to a minimum.

Diagnostic Value of Serum Sodium Level and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Predicting Severity of Acute Appendicitis: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Two-Center Study

Background and Objectives: The best way to distinguish complicated acute appendicitis (CAA) from uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UCAA) is still under debate. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential use of the serum sodium (Na+) level and the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) to distinguish CAA from UCAA and to evaluate whether CAA is more reliably diagnosed using these two variables together. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, two-center study of patients diagnosed with AA between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2023. The demographic and analytical variables were analyzed. The NLR was defined as the quotient between the absolute values of neutrophils and lymphocytes. Hyponatremia was defined as a serum Na+ level of ≤135 mmol/L. The sensitivity and specificity of the NLR and the serum Na+ level in the diagnosis of CAA were determined by assessing the receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: Among the patients who underwent an appendectomy, 3066 histologically confirmed AA cases were identified and included in this study. The registered data revealed that 348 (11.3%) patients had CAA, and the remaining 2718 (88.7%) patients had UCAA. The mean ages were 49.47 ± 18.97 and 38.16 ± 14.50, respectively (p < 0.001). The analysis revealed an exponential correlation between the NLR and the serum Na+ level with a moderate degree of agreement with CAA (Cohen's Kappa: 0.461, p < 0.001). For CAA, using the NLR and the serum Na+ level, the areas under the curve and the cutoffs were 0.664, 4.2 with a confidence interval (CI) of 0.647-0.681 and 0.727, 135 mmol/L with a CI of 0.711-0.742, respectively; all these values were significant with a p-value of <0.001. Conclusions: Although the serum Na+ level is a more effective marker than the NLR, using these two variables together can help detect high-risk patients who may benefit from early management by limiting delays in surgery.

Management of Inflammatory Phlegmon in Appendicitis: Comparing the Role of Emergency vs. Interval Appendectomy at a Single Institution

Background Acute appendicitis remains a common surgical pathology, with the accepted standard of care being appendectomy. However, in cases of acute appendicitis complicated by an inflammatory phlegmon, a dilemma remains regarding the best management options. The aim of our study was to examine the outcomes for patients with an appendiceal phlegmon, comparing emergency appendectomy with those who had initial conservative management followed by subsequent interval appendectomy. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis with inflammatory phlegmon (January 2012 to December 2022), looking into the outcomes of patients managed with emergency appendectomy versus conservative management and subsequent interval appendectomy. Results A total of 127 patients were included in our study: 85 (66.9%) underwent emergency appendectomy, and 42 (33.1%) underwent interval appendectomy. Patients who underwent emergency appendectomy had a significantly shorter duration of symptoms compared to those undergoing interval appendectomy (two vs. seven days). Furthermore, there was a higher likelihood of either a partial cecectomy or ileocolic/right hemicolectomy in those undergoing emergency appendectomy (p=0.021). However, there was no difference in 30-day morbidity or mortality. Conclusion This study highlights the challenges in managing appendiceal phlegmons. We propose that interval appendectomies should be considered for patients who present with extensive phlegmonous appendicitis and a prolonged duration of symptoms.

Interhospital variation in the non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis in adults

Background

Recent randomized trials have suggested non-operative management to be a safe alternative to appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Yet, there remains significant variability in treatment approach. This study sought to characterize center-level variation in non-operative management within a national cohort of adults presenting with appendicitis.

Methods

The 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried to identify all adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Hierarchical, mixed-effects models were developed to ascertain factors linked with non-operative management. Bayesian methodology was applied to predict random effects, which were then used to rank centers by increasing hospital-attributed rate of non-operative management. Institutions with high center-specific rates of non-operative management (>90th percentile) were considered low-operating hospitals (LOH).

Results

Of an estimated 447,500 patients, 52,523 (11.7 %) were managed non-operatively. Compared to those undergoing appendectomy, the non-operative cohort was older, more commonly male, and of a higher comorbidity burden. Approximately 30 % in the variability of non-operative management was attributable to hospital effects, with absolute, risk-adjusted rates ranging from 0.5 to 22.5 %. Centers with non-operative management rates ≥90th percentile were considered LOH.Following risk adjustment, among patients undergoing appendectomy, care at LOH was linked with greater odds of postoperative infection, resource utilization, and non-elective readmission.

Conclusions

We identified significant interhospital variation in the utilization of non-operative management for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Further, we found LOH to be associated with inferior outcomes following surgical management. Future work is needed to assess the care pathways that contribute to increased utilization of non-operative strategies, and disseminate best practices across institutions.

Culture-based bacterial evaluation of the appendix lumen and antibiotic susceptibility of acute appendicitis in Japan: A single-center retrospective analysis

The question of whether to perform an appendectomy or conservative treatment for acute appendicitis can differ depending on the facility or surgeon, but antibiotic treatment is administered regardless of whether an appendectomy or conservative treatment is selected. We investigated the contemporary bacteriology for acute appendicitis and evaluated the antibiotic sensitivity of the bacteria that are currently associated with appendicitis. We retrospectively analyzed the bacterial culture results and antibiotic susceptibility of 141 patients who underwent appendicitis surgery, including the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility of the cultured bacteria within the excised appendices. Bacterial cultures were positive in 131 cases (92.9%). The most commonly isolated bacteria were Escherichia coli (90 isolates, 66.7%), followed by Enterococcus species (n = 19, 14.5%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 18, 13.7%), Streptococcus species (n = 15, 11.5%), and Klebsiella species (n = 8, 6.1%). Eight strains (8.8%) of E coli were extended-spectrum β-lactamase producers, and ten strains (11.1%) were fluoroquinolone-resistant. Tazobactam/piperacillin and meropenem inhibited the growth of 100% of the major identified bacteria. The patients with appendicoliths had a significantly higher bacterial culture rate. Enterococcus species were frequently isolated from the patients with complicated appendicitis. For the antibiotic treatment of appendicitis, it is essential to understand the patient's microbiological profile and antibiotic susceptibilities. Research from Asian countries such as Japan can enhance our knowledge of regional antibiotic resistance patterns and inform effective treatment strategies.

Conservative Versus Surgical Management of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review

Recent studies have discussed the role of antibiotic treatment in the conservative management of acute appendicitis and whether antibiotics are a safe option to replace appendicectomy, which has been the gold standard treatment of acute appendicitis for many years. The bibliographic databases Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and PubMed comparing conservative versus surgical treatment of acute appendicitis were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Twenty-one studies consisting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses involving 44,699 participants were identified. At least 17,865 participants were treated with antibiotics. Our studies compare antibiotic versus appendicectomy among acute appendicitis patients ranging from 7 to 94 years of age. In most studies, patients received parenteral antibiotics for a total of one to three days, and oral antibiotics such as oral cephalosporin plus metronidazole, oral amoxicillin/clavulanate, oral fluoroquinolones plus Tinidazole upon hospital discharge for a total of 7 to 10 days. The total course of antibiotics for both parenteral and oral regimes ranged from 2 to 16 days, with 10 days being the commonest duration. The recurrence rate following initial antibiotic treatment at one-year follow-up ranged from 13% to 38%, while the mean duration of recurrence ranged from three to eight months. The majority of the patients with recurrence underwent appendicectomy, while some patients were either given a repeat or different course of antibiotics due to the possible presence of antibiotic resistance; however, only 2.4% of the patients were successfully treated upon completion of the second course of antibiotics. Most of the studies concluded that appendicectomy remains the gold standard treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis, given its higher efficacy and lower complication rates. Although antibiotic treatment cannot be routinely recommended, it can be considered an appropriate alternative in selected patients with uncomplicated appendicitis who wish to avoid surgery and also acknowledge the risk of recurrence and the potential need for subsequent surgery at the same time.

A Case Report of Perforated Appendix Vermiform Attached to the Left Ovary

Acute appendicitis, a typical abdominal emergency, presents in nonperforated and perforated forms. While nonperforated cases often respond well to antibiotics or appendectomy, perforated cases pose more significant challenges. We report a unique case of appendicitis in a 34-year-old female with an unusual anatomical adherence to the left ovary. The patient successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery, during which precise incisions were made to accommodate the unique location of the appendix. This tailored approach contributed to a positive surgical outcome. This case underscores the importance of tailored surgical approaches in managing complex appendiceal variations.

Factors associated with recurrent appendicitis after successful treatment with antibiotics

BACKGROUND

As more patients with appendicitis are treated with antibiotics, factors associated with recurrence may help inform individualized prognostication and decision-making.

METHODS

This cohort study, using data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy trial, examined patients treated with antibiotics who did not undergo appendicectomy in the first 30 days. Patients who had appendicectomy between 30 days and 1 year were compared with those who did not. Marginalized logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted risk differences (RDs) to estimate the association between baseline patient factors and the risk of undergoing an appendicectomy between 30 days and 1 year.

RESULTS

Of 601 patients treated with antibiotics who did not undergo appendicectomy within 30 days (mean age 38.0 years; 217 women (36.1 per cent)), 144 had an appendicectomy and 56 were lost to follow-up between 30 days and 1 year. The estimated rate of appendicectomy between 30 days and 1 year was 28.6 (95 per cent c.i. 25.0 to 32.8) per cent. After adjustment for other factors, nausea, vomiting, or anorexia at baseline presentation was associated with an increased rate of appendicectomy between 30 days and 1 year (adjusted RD 17.52, 95 per cent c.i. 8.64 to 26.40). The presence of an appendicolith (adjusted RD 3.64, -6.08 to 13.36), or an abscess, perforation, or fat stranding on initial imaging (adjusted RD -7.23, -17.41 to 2.95) was not strongly associated with appendicectomy between 30 days and 1 year.

CONCLUSION

Most factors commonly associated with appendicitis severity were not strongly associated with an increased risk of undergoing appendicectomy in the longer term after treatment with antibiotics.

Characteristics of appendicitis after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy among cancer patients

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has revolutionized cancer care but is associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Recent case reports raised the concern that acute appendicitis may be an irAE. In this study, we sought to describe the disease course of post-ICI therapy appendicitis and its associated complications.

METHODS

Adult patients who had an International Classification of Diseases code for appendicitis within the first 2 years after initiating ICI therapy from January 2010 to April 2021 and who had imaging evidence of appendicitis were studied retrospectively.

RESULTS

13,991 patients were identified who had ICI exposure during the study period, 44 had codes for appendicitis, 10 of whom met the inclusion criteria. Their median age at the time of diagnosis was 59 years. The median time from ICI therapy initiation to appendicitis onset was 188 days. The most common presenting symptoms were abdominal pain (70%) and fever (40%). Abscesses were present in two patients, and a perforation was present in one. All 10 patients received broad-spectrum antibiotics. Five patients needed surgery or interventional radiology drainage. Nine patients had resolution of appendicitis symptoms after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Post-ICI therapy appendicitis is rare but presents similarly to and has similar complications rates as conventional appendicitis. Appendectomy remains the mainstay of treatment, but its use can be limited in cancer patients. The decision to continue ICI therapy remains at the discretion of the clinician. Further studies are needed to bring awareness to and advance the understanding of this clinical entity.

Typical and Atypical Presentations of Appendicitis and Their Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment: A Literature Review

Appendicitis, an acute inflammation of the appendix, affects all demographic groups and exhibits various incidences and clinical manifestations. While acute appendicitis typically presents with colicky periumbilical abdominal pain that localizes to the right lower quadrant, atypical presentations are more common in children, geriatric, and pregnant patient populations, leading to delays in diagnosis. Clinical evaluation, clinical scoring systems, and inflammatory markers are commonly used, but their limitations have led to the increased use of diagnostic imaging in patients suspected of appendicitis. Acute appendicitis is managed by non-operative and operative management, depending on whether it is uncomplicated or complicated. Developing diagnostic pathways to improve outcomes and reduce complications is crucial. Although medical advancements have been made, diagnosing and managing appendicitis can be challenging, mainly when patients are present atypically. This literature review aims to comprehensively review typical and atypical presentations of appendicitis and their current implications for diagnosis and treatment modalities in pediatric, adult, pregnant, and geriatric patient populations.

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of appendicitis in a population with a high HIV-infection prevalence

•

Many African countries have a high HIV-infection prevalence. Appendicitis is one of the common emergencies and its incidence is increasing in Africa.

•

Literatures documenting the comparative demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of appendicitis between HIV-infected and non-infected patients are limited in Africa.

•

This study, conducted in an African country, informs the stakeholders in Botswana and other African countries with a similar setup on the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of appendicitis patients with HIV-infection, and it helps to design a relevant research and approach to patient management.

Introduction

Method

Results

Conclusion

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.

Analysis of Outcomes Associated With Outpatient Management of Nonoperatively Treated Patients With Appendicitis

IMPORTANCE

In the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized to receive antibiotics had outpatient management with hospital discharge within 24 hours. If outpatient management is safe, it could increase convenience and decrease health care use and costs.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use and safety of outpatient management of acute appendicitis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study, which is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, included 776 adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis who received antibiotics at 25 US hospitals from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Participants randomized to antibiotics (intravenous then oral) could be discharged from the emergency department based on clinician judgment and prespecified criteria (hemodynamically stable, afebrile, oral intake tolerated, pain controlled, and follow-up confirmed). Outpatient management and hospitalization were defined as discharge within or after 24 hours, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes compared among patients receiving outpatient vs inpatient care included serious adverse events (SAEs), appendectomies, health care encounters, satisfaction, missed workdays at 7 days, and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) score at 30 days. In addition, appendectomy incidence among outpatients and inpatients, unadjusted and adjusted for illness severity, was compared.

RESULTS

Among 776 antibiotic-randomized participants, 42 (5.4%) underwent appendectomy within 24 hours and 8 (1.0%) did not receive their first antibiotic dose within 24 hours, leaving 726 (93.6%) comprising the study population (median age, 36 years; range, 18-86 years; 462 [63.6%] male; 437 [60.2%] White). Of these participants, 335 (46.1%; site range, 0-89.2%) were discharged within 24 hours, and 391 (53.9%) were discharged after 24 hours. Over 7 days, SAEs occurred in 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-2.6) per 100 outpatients and 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.9) per 100 inpatients; in the appendicolith subgroup, SAEs occurred in 2.3 (95% CI, 0.3-8.2) per 100 outpatients vs 2.8 (95% CI, 0.6-7.9) per 100 inpatients. During this period, appendectomy occurred in 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9%-13.7%) of outpatients and 14.1% (95% CI, 10.8%-18.0%) of inpatients; adjusted analysis demonstrated a similar difference in incidence (-4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to 0.6). At 30 days, appendectomies occurred in 12.6% (95% CI, 9.1%-16.7%) of outpatients and 19.0% (95% CI, 15.1%-23.4%) of inpatients. Outpatients missed fewer workdays (2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.3-2.9 days) than did inpatients (3.8 days; 95% CI, 3.4-4.3 days) and had similar frequency of return health care visits and high satisfaction and EQ-5D scores.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings support that outpatient antibiotic management is safe for selected adults with acute appendicitis, with no greater risk of complications or appendectomy than hospital care, and should be included in shared decision-making discussions of patient preferences for outcomes associated with nonoperative and operative care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

The radiologic roadmap for treatment of an acute appendicitis patient who tested positive for coronavirus disease 19

Objective

In this study, we aimed to emphasize the role of radiological imaging in determining the treatment of a patient, who tested positive for COVID-19 and diagnosed with acute appendicitis during the pandemic.

Methods

A 31-year-old patient presented to the emergency department due to abdominal pain. Ultrasound examination, thoracic and pelvic CT scan were performed.

Results

Non-complicated appendicitis can be treated conservatively with antibiotics. Treatment can be maintained by starting with IV antibiotics and bridging therapy with oral antibiotics.

Conclusion

This studysummarize how radiological follow-up can be used to decide on the suitability of the patient for appropriate medical treatment as an alternative to surgery in a patient, whose gold standard treatment is emergency surgical intervention, which is frequently encountered in the emergency department during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare workers need to be protected to ensure the continuity of the health system. On the other hand, patients requiring emergency healthcare should also be provided with appropriate treatment. Healthcare professionals should choose the most appropriate treatment method, protecting themselves and their patients as much as possible.

Acute appendicitis-advances and controversies

Being one of the most common causes of the acute abdomen, acute appendicitis (AA) forms the bread and butter of any general surgeon's practice. With the recent advancements in AA's management, much controversy in diagnostic algorithms, possible differential diagnoses, and weighing the management options has been generated, with no absolute consensus in the literature. Since Alvarado described his eponymous clinical scoring system in 1986 to stratify AA risk, there has been a burgeoning of additional scores for guiding downstream management and mortality assessment. Furthermore, advancing literature on the role of antibiotics, variations in appendicectomy, and its adjuncts have expanded the surgeon's repertoire of management options. Owing to the varied presentation, diagnostic tools, and management of AA have also been proposed in special groups such as pregnant patients, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. This article seeks to raise the critical debates about what is currently known about the above aspects of AA and explore the latest controversies in the field. Considering the ever-evolving coronavirus disease 2019 situation worldwide, we also discuss the pandemic's repercussions on patients and how surgeons' practices have evolved in the context of AA.

Are average platelet volume, red cell distribution width and platelet distribution width guiding markers for acute appendicitis treatment options?

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common cause of surgery performed for the acute abdomen. The standard treatment for AA patients has been appendectomy for more than a century. The use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, the medical treatment option has come to the fore in the treatment of uncomplicated AA.

AIM

Evaluate whether white blood cell (WBC), platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV), platelet distribution width (PDW), red cell distribution width (RDW) and C-reactive protein (CRP) values of patients diagnosed with uncomplicated AA clinically, with laboratory tests and radiologically with abdominal computed tomography (CT) could be a marker for choosing medical or surgical treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

519 patients aged between 20 and 65 years who were diagnosed with uncomplicated AA by abdominal CT in our centre between January 2016 and January 2019 were retrospectively analysed. The presence of at least one of the criteria of 7 mm or more appendix diameter and oedema or fluid accumulation around the appendix was accepted as uncomplicated AA. After the diagnosis of AA, 223 patients were treated medically, while 296 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. The first group included patients who were treated medically and the second group included patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy.

RESULTS

Group 2 patients had higher mean platelet count (P < .005) and RDW (P = .003) values compared to Group 1 patients, while mean PDW (P < .001) values were lower compared to those of Group 1 patients. The differences between the mean WBC, CRP and MPV values of the groups were not statistically significant (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Recently, studies supporting antibiotic therapy have been conducted in patients diagnosed with AA. As a result, we think that PDW, RDW, and platelet values in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated AA may be a guide in choosing patients to be treated with surgery or antibiotics.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nonoperative management versus open and laparoscopic surgery for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in Colombia

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18-60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

METHODS

We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18-60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer's perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

LA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was $24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

LA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer's perspective in the Colombian health system.

Effect of Oral Moxifloxacin vs Intravenous Ertapenem Plus Oral Levofloxacin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The APPAC II Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Antibiotics are an effective and safe alternative to appendectomy for managing uncomplicated acute appendicitis, but the optimal antibiotic regimen is not known.

Objective

To compare oral antibiotics with combined intravenous followed by oral antibiotics in the management of computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) II multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2017 until November 2018 in 9 Finnish hospitals. A total of 599 patients aged 18 to 60 years with computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis were enrolled in the trial. The last date of follow-up was November 29, 2019.

Interventions

Patients randomized to receive oral monotherapy (n = 295) received oral moxifloxacin (400 mg/d) for 7 days. Patients randomized to receive intravenous antibiotics followed by oral antibiotics (n = 288) received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 2 days followed by oral levofloxacin (500 mg/d) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times/d) for 5 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was treatment success (≥65%) for both groups, defined as discharge from hospital without surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during 1-year follow-up, and to determine whether oral antibiotics alone were noninferior to intravenous and oral antibiotics, with a margin of 6% for difference.

Results

Among 599 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 36 [12] years; 263 [44%] women), 581 (99.7%) were available for the 1-year follow-up. The treatment success rate at 1 year was 70.2% (1-sided 95% CI, 65.8% to ∞) for patients treated with oral antibiotics and 73.8% (1-sided 95% CI, 69.5% to ∞) for patients treated with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics. The difference was -3.6% ([1-sided 95% CI, -9.7% to ∞]; P = .26 for noninferiority), with the confidence limit exceeding the noninferiority margin.

Conclusion and Relevance

Among adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, treatment with 7 days of oral moxifloxacin compared with 2 days of intravenous ertapenem followed by 5 days of levofloxacin and metronidazole resulted in treatment success rates greater than 65% in both groups, but failed to demonstrate noninferiority for treatment success of oral antibiotics compared with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03236961; EudraCT Identifier: 2015-003633-10.

Factors affecting the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy: A single center study

AIM

This study aimed to explore factors may affect the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

The data of 636 patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy between July 2016 and July 2019 in Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into group A (hospital stay ≤3 days, 348 patients) and group B (hospital stay >3 days, 288 patients) according to their hospital stay.Sex, age, disease onset time(time from onset to admission), nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, peritonitis, comorbidities, and history of appendicitis; preoperative body temperature (T), white blood cell (WBC) count, percentage of neutrophilic granulocytes, and preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) level; time from diagnosis to surgery. appendix diameter, appendicolith, and ascites in ultrasound or CT; surgical time(the surgery start time was the time of skin incision, and the end time was the time the anesthesia intubation was removed), intraoperative blood loss (the volume of blood infiltrating into a gauze was calculated by weighing the gauze infiltrated with water and calculating the volume of water), intraoperative adhesions or effusions, and stump closure methods, convert to open appendectomy, appendix pathology(perforated or gangrenous appendicitis were defined as complicated appendicitis and simple or suppurative appendicitis were defined as uncomplicated appendicitis) and antibiotic treatment schemes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were detected between group A and group B in age (37.10 ± 13.52y vs 42.94 ± 15.57y, P<0.01), disease onset time (21.36 ± 16.56 h vs 32.52 ± 27.99 h, P <0.01), time from diagnosis to surgery (8.63 ± 7.29 h vs 10.70 ± 8.47 h, P<0.01); surgical time(64.09 ± 17.24 min vs 86.19 ± 39.96 min, P < 0.01); peritonitis(52.9% vs 74%, P < 0.01), comorbidities (12.4% vs 20.5%, P < 0.01), appendicolith (27.6% vs 41.7%, P < 0.01), ascites before the surgery(13.8% vs 22.9%, P < 0.01), intraoperative adhesions or effusions(56% vs 80.2%, P < 0.01); preoperative temperature (37.11 ± 0.64°C vs 37.54 ± 0.90°C, P < 0.01); preoperative WBC count (13.06 ± 3.39 × 109/L vs 14.21 ± 4.54 × 109/L, P = 0.04);preoperative CRP level(18.99 ± 31.72 mg/L vs 32.46 ± 46.68 mg/L, P < 0.01); appendix diameter(10.22 ± 2.59 mm vs 11.26 ± 3.23 mm, P < 0.01); intraoperative blood loss (9.36 ± 7.29 mL vs 13.74 ± 13.49 mL, P < 0.01); using Hem-o-lok for stump closure(30.7% vs 38.5%, P = 0.04); complicated appendicitis (9.5% vs 45.8%, P < 0.01); and using ertapenem for antibiotic treatment after the surgery(4.3% vs 21.5%, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age (OR = 1.021; 95%CI = 1.007-1.036), peritonitis (OR = 1.603; 95% CI = 1.062-2.419), preoperative WBC count (OR = 1.084; 95% CI = 1.025-1.046), preoperative CRP level (OR = 1.010; 95% CI = 1.005-1.015), time from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.043; 95% CI = 1.015-1.072), appendicolith (OR = 1.852; 95% CI = 1.222-2.807), complicated appendicitis (OR = 3.536; 95% CI = 2.132-5.863), surgical time (OR = 1.025; 95% CI = 1.016-1.034), use of Hem-o-lok for stump closure (OR = 1.894; 95% CI = 1.257-2.852), and use of ertapenem for antibiotic treatment (OR = 3.076; 95% CI = 1.483-6.378) were the risk factors for a prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient with appendicitis was older and had peritonitis, higher preoperative WBC count or CRP level, longer time from diagnosis to surgery, appendicolith, and complicated appendicitis, predicting a prolonged hospital stay. Shorter surgical time and the use of silk ligation for stump closure and cephalosporins + metronidazole for antibiotic treatment might be better choices to obtain a shorter hospital stay.

Quality of Life and Patient Satisfaction at 7-Year Follow-up of Antibiotic Therapy vs Appendectomy for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Long-term results support antibiotics for uncomplicated acute appendicitis as an alternative to appendectomy. To our knowledge, treatment-related long-term patient satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) are not known.

Objective

To determine patient satisfaction and QOL after antibiotic therapy and appendectomy for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Interventions

Open appendectomy vs antibiotics with intravenous ertapenem, 1 g once daily, for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin, 500 mg once daily, and metronidazole, 500 mg 3 times per day.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational follow-up of the Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing appendectomy with antibiotics included 530 patients age 18 to 60 years with computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis who were randomized to undergo appendectomy (273 [52%]) or receive antibiotics (257 [49%]). The trial was conducted from November 2009 to June 2012; the last follow-up was May 9, 2018. The data were analyzed in February 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

In this analysis, post hoc secondary end points of postintervention QOL (EQ-5D-5L) and patient satisfaction and treatment preference were evaluated.

Results

Of the 530 patients enrolled in the trial (appendectomy group: 273 [174 men (64%)] with a median age of 35 years; (antibiotic group: 257 [155 men (60%)] with a median age of 33 years), 423 patients (80%) were available for phone interview at a median follow-up of 7 years; 206 patients (80%) took antibiotics and 217 (79%) underwent appendectomy. Of the 206 patients taking antibiotics, 81 (39%) had undergone appendectomy. The QOL between appendectomy and antibiotic group patients was similar (median health index value, 1.0 in both groups; 95% CI, 0.86-1.0; P = .96). Patients who underwent appendectomy were more satisfied in the treatment than patients taking antibiotics (68% very satisfied, 21% satisfied, 6% indifferent, 4% unsatisfied, and 1% very unsatisfied in the appendectomy group and 53% very satisfied, 21% satisfied, 13% indifferent, 7% unsatisfied, and 6% very unsatisfied in the antibiotic group; P < .001) and in a subgroup analysis this difference was based on the antibiotic group patients undergoing appendectomy. There was no difference in patient satisfaction after successful antibiotic treatment compared with appendectomy (cumulative odds ratio [COR], 7.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.3; P < .36). Patients with appendectomy or with successful antibiotic therapy were more satisfied than antibiotic group patients who later underwent appendectomy (COR, 7.7; 95% CI, 4.6-12.9; P < .001; COR, 9.7; 95% CI, 5.4-15.3; P < .001, respectively). Of the 81 patients taking antibiotics who underwent appendectomy, 27 (33%) would again choose antibiotics as their primary treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this analysis, long-term QOL was similar after appendectomy and antibiotic therapy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients taking antibiotics who later underwent appendectomy were less satisfied than patients with successful antibiotics or appendectomy.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01022567.

An Unusual Case of Acute Appendicitis due to Metastatic Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency in older adults. In the elderly, like in younger cohorts, acute appendicitis most commonly arises without neoplastic underpinnings. However, the occurrence of acute appendicitis in a patient with a concurrent abdominopelvic malignancy should trigger suspicion for the possibility of a metastatic appendiceal neoplasm. We present the case of a 66-year-old man with a background of a biochemically recurrent prostatic adenocarcinoma who presented to the emergency department with acute appendicitis. Histopathologic examination of the resected appendix revealed an unexpected metastatic spread from his prostatic adenocarcinoma.

Cost Saving of Short Hospitalization Nonoperative Management for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management (NOM) of uncomplicated appendicitis has gained recognition as an alternative to surgery. In the largest published randomized trial (Appendicitis Acuta), patients received a 3-d hospital stay for intravenous antibiotics; however, cost implications for health care systems remain unknown. We hypothesized short stay protocols would be cost saving compared with a long stay protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We constructed a Markov model comparing the cost of three protocols for NOM of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: (1) long stay (3-d hospitalization), (2) short stay (1-d hospitalization), and (3) emergency department (ED) discharge. The long stay protocol was modeled on data from the APPAC trial. Model variables were abstracted from national database and literature review. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the impact of uncertainty on the model.

RESULTS

The long stay treatment protocol had a total 5-y projected cost of $10,735 per patient. The short stay treatment protocol costs $8026 per patient, and the ED discharge protocol costs $6,825, which was $2709 and $3910 less than the long stay protocol, respectively. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the relative risk of treatment failure with the short stay protocol needed to exceed 6.3 (absolute risk increase of 31%) and with the ED discharge protocol needed to exceed 8.75 (absolute risk increase of 45%) in order for the long stay protocol to become cost saving.

CONCLUSIONS

Short duration hospitalization protocols to treat appendicitis nonoperatively with antibiotics are cost saving under almost all model scenarios. Future consideration of patient preferences and health-related quality of life will need to be made to determine if short stay treatment protocols are cost-effective.

Cost analysis of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: 5-year results of the APPAC randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been established at long-term follow-up with the majority of recurrences shown to occur within the first year. Overall costs of antibiotics are significantly lower compared with appendectomy at short-term follow-up, but long-term durability of these cost savings is unclear. The study objective was to compare the long-term overall costs of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial at 5 years.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This multicentre, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial randomly assigned 530 adult patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis to appendectomy or antibiotic treatment at six Finnish hospitals. All major costs during the 5-year follow-up were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis. Between November 2009 and June 2012, 273 patients were randomized to appendectomy and 257 to antibiotics. The overall costs of appendectomy were 1.4 times higher (p<0.001) (€5716; 95% CI: €5510 to €5925) compared with antibiotic therapy (€4171; 95% CI: €3879 to €4463) resulting in cost savings of €1545 per patient (95% CI: €1193 to €1899; p<0.001) in the antibiotic group. At 5 years, the majority (61%, n = 156) of antibiotic group patients did not undergo appendectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

At 5-year follow-up antibiotic treatment resulted in significantly lower overall costs compared with appendectomy. As the majority of appendicitis recurrences occur within the first year after the initial antibiotic treatment, these results suggest that treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis with antibiotics instead of appendectomy results in lower overall costs even at longer-term follow-up.