Laparoscopic or open appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis in pregnancy and evaluation of foetal outcome in Australia

SAGES guidelines for the use of laparoscopy during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations for pregnant patients presenting with common surgical pathologies including appendicitis, biliary disease, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee convened a working group to address these issues. The group generated five key questions and completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. An expert panel then met to form evidence-based recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Expert opinion was utilized when the available evidence was deemed insufficient.

RESULTS

The expert panel agreed on ten recommendations addressing the management of appendicitis, biliary disease, and IBD during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Conditional recommendations were made in favor of appendectomy over nonoperative treatment of appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over nonoperative treatment of biliary disease and acute cholecystitis specifically. Based on expert opinion, the panel also suggested either operative or nonoperative treatment of biliary diseases other than acute cholecystitis in the third trimester, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography rather than common bile duct exploration for symptomatic choledocholithiasis, applying the same criteria for emergent surgical intervention in pregnant and non-pregnant IBD patients, utilizing an open rather than minimally invasive approach for pregnant patients requiring emergent surgical treatment of IBD, and managing pregnant patients with active IBD flares in a multidisciplinary fashion at centers with IBD expertise.

Concomitant Paratubal Cyst and Isolated Fallopian Tube Torsion Masquerading as Acute Appendicitis in a Pregnant Female

Abdominal pain in pregnant individuals presents diagnostic challenges, especially when appendicitis is suspected. We report a rare case of a 26-year-old pregnant female with recurrent right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal pain initially misdiagnosed as a urinary tract infection. Diagnostic uncertainty led to a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, which revealed a right adnexal cystic structure and a thickened tubular structure adjacent to the cecal pole, raising concerns of complicated appendicitis. Subsequent diagnostic laparoscopy revealed a right-sided fallopian tube paratubal cyst with 360-degree torsion and associated fallopian tube torsion without the involvement of the ovary. The cyst was successfully excised, and the patient subsequently delivered a healthy baby via emergency lower section caesarean section. Abdominal pain during pregnancy has various causes. Diagnosing appendicitis during pregnancy is challenging due to anatomical and physiological changes. Ultrasound (US) is commonly used but has limited accuracy. Computed tomography (CT) is avoided due to radiation risks, while MRI is increasingly used and shows high diagnostic accuracy or aids in alternative diagnoses. Regardless of the diagnosis, the prompt recognition of intraabdominal pathology is crucial to prevent fetal morbidity. This case highlights the challenges in the accurate diagnosis of abdominal pain during pregnancy and emphasizes the importance of considering alternative pathologies to prevent delays in treatment and complications. Clinicians should consider diagnostic laparoscopy for pregnant patients with equivocal investigations and lower abdominal pain. The differential diagnosis may include both common and rare causes such as concomitant paratubal cyst and isolated fallopian tube torsion (IFTT), emphasizing a high index of suspicion and collaboration with obstetric colleagues to ensure optimal care.

Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy and the effects on maternal and fetal outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Non-obstetric surgery is fairly common in pregnant women. We performed a systematic review to update data on non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy on pregnancy, fetal and maternal outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE and Scopus was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search span was from January 2000 to November 2022. Thirty-six studies matched the inclusion criteria, and 24 publications were identified through reference mining; 60 studies were included in this review. Outcome measures were miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm birth, low birth weight, low Apgar score, and infant and maternal morbidity and mortality rates.

RESULTS

We obtained data for 80,205 women who underwent non-obstetric surgery and data for 16,655,486 women who did not undergo surgery during pregnancy. Prevalence of non-obstetric surgery was between 0.23% and 0.74% (median 0.37%). Appendectomy was the most common procedure with median prevalence of 0.10%. Near half (43%) of the procedures were performed during the second trimester, 32% during the first trimester, and 25% during the third trimester. Half of surgeries were scheduled, and half were emergent. Laparoscopic and open techniques were used equally for abdominal cavity. Women who underwent non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy had increased rate of stillbirth (odds ratio (OR) 2.0) and preterm birth (OR 2.1) compared to women without surgery. Surgery during pregnancy did not increase rate of miscarriage (OR 1.1), low 5 min Apgar scores (OR 1.1), the fetus being small for gestational age (OR 1.1) or congenital anomalies (OR 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of non-obstetric surgery has decreased during last decades, but still two out of 1000 pregnant women have scheduled surgery during pregnancy. Surgery during pregnancy increases the risk of stillbirth, and preterm birth. For abdominal cavity surgery, both laparoscopic and open approaches are feasible.

Adverse Fetal Outcomes and Maternal Mortality Following Nonobstetric Abdominopelvic Surgery in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the absolute risks of adverse fetal outcomes and maternal mortality following nonobstetric abdominopelvic surgery in pregnancy.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Surgery is often necessary in pregnancy, but absolute measures of risk required to guide perioperative management are lacking.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EvidenceBased Medicine Reviews from January 1, 2000, to December 9, 2020, for observational studies and randomized trials of pregnant patients undergoing nonobstetric abdominopelvic surgery. We determined the pooled proportions of fetal loss, preterm birth, and maternal mortality using a generalized linear random/mixed effects model with a logit link.

RESULTS

We identified 114 observational studies (52 [46%] appendectomy, 34 [30%] adnexal, 8 [7%] cholecystectomy, 20 [17%] mixed types) reporting on 67,111 pregnant patients. Overall pooled proportions of fetal loss, preterm birth, and maternal mortality were 2.8% (95% CI 2.2-3.6), 9.7% (95% CI 8.3-11.4), and 0.04% (95% CI 0.02-0.09; 4/10,000), respectively. Rates of fetal loss and preterm birth were higher for pelvic inflammatory conditions (eg, appendectomy, adnexal torsion) than for abdominal or nonurgent conditions (eg, cholecystectomy, adnexal mass). Surgery in the second and third trimesters was associated with lower rates of fetal loss (0.1%) and higher rates of preterm birth (13.5%) than surgery in the first and second trimesters (fetal loss 2.9%, preterm birth 5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Absolute risks of adverse fetal outcomes after nonobstetric abdom- inopelvic surgery vary with gestational age, indication, and acuity. Pooled estimates derived here identify high-risk clinical scenarios, and can inform implementation of mitigation strategies and improve preoperative counselling.

Open versus laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pregnancy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is the standard treatment for acute appendicitis (AA) in general population. However, the safety of LA during pregnancy has remained a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical and obstetrical outcomes in pregnant women who underwent LA vs. open appendectomy (OA) for AA. We hypothesized that LA results in improved surgical and obstetric outcomes during pregnancy.

METHODS

Using a nationwide claim-based database in Estonia, a retrospective review of all cases of pregnant women undergoing OA or LA for AA from 2010 to 2020 was performed. Patient characteristics, surgical and obstetrical outcomes were analyzed. Primary outcomes were preterm delivery, fetal loss and perinatal mortality. Secondary outcomes included operative time, hospital length of stay (HLOS) and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 102 patients were included of whom 68 (67%) underwent OA and 34 patients (33%) LA, respectively. Patients in LA cohort had a significantly shorter length of pregnancy in terms of gestational weeks when compared to OA cohort (12 weeks versus 17 weeks, p = 0.002). Most of the patients in their 3^rd trimester pregnancy were subjected to OA. Operative time in LA cohort was shorter than in OA cohort (34 min. versus 44 min., p = 0.038). HLOS in LA cohort was shorter than in OA cohort (2.1 days versus 2.9 days, p = 0.016). There were no differences between OA and LA cohorts in terms of surgical complications or obstetrical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis was associated with a significantly shorter operative time and a shorter hospital length of stay while open and laparoscopic appendectomy cohorts experienced comparable obstetrical outcomes. Our findings support the laparoscopic approach for acute appendicitis in pregnancy.

EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on appendicitis in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice recommendations for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-informed, trustworthy guideline on the management of appendicitis in pregnancy. We aimed to address the questions of conservative or surgical management, and laparoscopic or open surgery for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence appraisal using the GRADE methodology. A European, multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, obstetricians/gynecologists, a midwife, and 3 patient representatives reached consensus through an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to formulate the recommendations. The project was developed in an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp).

RESULTS

Research evidence was of very low certainty. We recommend operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with complicated appendicitis or appendicolith on imaging studies (strong recommendation). We suggest operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with uncomplicated appendicitis and no appendicolith on imaging studies (weak recommendation). We suggest laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis until the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is below the level of the umbilicus; and laparoscopic or open appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis beyond the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is above the level of the umbilicus, depending on the preference and expertise of the surgeon.

CONCLUSION

Through a structured, evidence-informed approach, an interdisciplinary panel provides a strong recommendation to perform appendectomy for complicated appendicitis or appendicolith, and laparoscopic or open appendectomy beyond the 20th week, based on the surgeon's preference and expertise.

GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER

IPGRP-2022CN210.

Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in pregnancy: experience from a single institution and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis remains an uncommon cause of non-obstetric abdominal pain during pregnancy, with surgery being the preferred management option. We examined our experience with the surgical management of appendicitis during pregnancy, particularly the risk of foetal loss during the 1st and 2nd trimester and performed a meta-analysis of the available literature.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who had an appendicectomy during pregnancy (January 2010 to December 2019) and a meta-analysis comparing foetal death in open appendicectomy versus laparoscopic appendicectomy during the 1st and 2nd trimester.

RESULTS

Seventy pregnant patients were included in our study (57 laparoscopic, 13 open). There were 4 foetal deaths during the study period (7%), all of which occurred after the laparoscopic approach (P-value = 0.578). Open appendicectomies were associated with an increased risk of pre-term delivery (P-value = 0.038). The meta-analysis of 9 studies, which included 311 patients, showed that there was no significant difference between OA and LA in foetal deaths during the 1st and 2nd trimesters (1st trimester foetal deaths: 9/143 laparoscopic versus 4/57 open, M-H risk difference-0.02, 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.10): 2nd trimester foetal deaths: 7/159 laparoscopic versus 2/154 Open, M-H risk difference 0.03, 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.09).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest there is no increased risk of foetal loss in pregnant patients undergoing a laparoscopic appendicectomy.

The risk of miscarriage following surgical treatment of heterotopic extrauterine pregnancies

STUDY QUESTION

What is the risk of loss of a live normally sited (eutopic) pregnancy following surgical treatment of the concomitant extrauterine ectopic pregnancy?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In women diagnosed with heterotopic pregnancies, minimally invasive surgery to treat the extrauterine ectopic pregnancy does not increase the risk of miscarriage of the concomitant live eutopic pregnancy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Previous studies have indicated that surgical treatment of the concomitant ectopic pregnancy in women with live eutopic pregnancies could be associated with an increased risk of miscarriage. The findings of our study did not confirm that.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A retrospective observational case–control study of 52 women diagnosed with live eutopic and concomitant extrauterine pregnancies matched to 156 women with live normally sited singleton pregnancies. The study was carried out in three London early pregnancy units (EPUs) covering a 20-year period between April 2000 and November 2019.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All women attended EPUs because of suspected early pregnancy complications. The diagnosis of heterotopic pregnancy was made on ultrasound scan and women were subsequently offered surgical or expectant management.

There were three controls per each case who were randomly selected from our clinical database and were matched for maternal age, mode of conception and gestational age at presentation.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In the study group 49/52 (94%) women had surgery and 3/52 (6%) were managed expectantly. There were 9/52 (17%, 95% CI 8.2–30.3) miscarriages <12 weeks’ gestation and 9/49 (18%, 95% CI 8.7–32) miscarriages in those treated surgically. In the control group, there were 28/156 (18%, 95% CI 12.2–24.8) miscarriages <12 weeks’ gestation, which was not significantly different from heterotopic pregnancies who were treated surgically [odds ratio (OR) 1.03 95% CI 0.44–2.36]. There was a further second trimester miscarriage in the study group and one in the control group. The live birth rate in the study group was 41/51 (80%, 95% CI 66.9–90.2) and 38/48 (79%, 95% CI 65–89.5) for those who were treated surgically. These results were similar to 127/156 (81%, 95% CI 74.4–87.2) live births in the control group (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.39–1.94).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study is retrospective, and the number of patients is relatively small, which reflects the rarity of heterotopic pregnancies. Heterotopic pregnancies without a known outcome were excluded from analysis.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study demonstrates that in women diagnosed with heterotopic pregnancies, minimally invasive surgery to treat the extrauterine pregnancy does not increase the risk of miscarriage of the concomitant live eutopic pregnancy. This finding will be helpful to women and their clinicians when discussing the options for treating heterotopic pregnancies.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work did not receive any funding. None of the authors has any conflict of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Research Registry: researchregistry6430.

Association of treatments for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes in the United States from 2000 to 2016: Results from a multi-level analysis

Background

Open appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, and non-surgical treatment are three options to treat acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Previous studies on the association of different treatment methods for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes have been limited by small sample sizes and residual confounding, especially with respect to hospital-level factors. This study aimed to investigate the association of treatment method for acute appendicitis with pregnancy outcomes using a multi-level analysis.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted based on a large electronic health records database in the United States during the period 2000 to 2016. All pregnancies diagnosed with acute appendicitis and treated in participating hospitals during the study period were included. We conducted multi-level hierarchical logistic regression to analyze both individual- and hospital-level factors for abortion, preterm labor, and cesarean section.

Results

A total of 10,271 acute appendicitis during pregnancy were identified during the study period. Of them, 5,872 (57.2%) were treated by laparoscopic appendectomy, 1,403 (13.7%) by open appendectomy, and 2,996 (29.2%) by non-surgical treatment. Compared with open appendectomy, both laparoscopic appendectomy (adjusted OR, 0.6, 95% CI, 0.4, 0.9) and non-surgical treatment (adjusted OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3–0.7) showed a decreased risk of preterm labor. Other important individual-level determinants of adverse pregnancy outcomes included maternal age, gestational hypertension, and anemia during pregnancy, the hospital-level determinant included the number of beds.

Conclusions

Compared with open appendectomy, both laparoscopic appendectomy and non-surgical treatment may be associated with a lower risk of preterm labor, without increased risks of abortion and cesarean section.

Surgical and obstetrical outcomes after laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy: a case-matched analysis

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for acute appendicitis (AA) remains controversial during pregnancy. We aimed to determine surgical and obstetrical outcomes of LA in pregnant women.

METHODS

Pregnant women who underwent LA for AA (G1) between 2006 and 2019 were included and matched by gender, age, white blood cells, ASA score, and presence of peritonitis in a 1:2 ratio with non-pregnant women who had undergone LA (G2). Demographics and surgical outcomes were compared between groups. Preterm delivery and fetal loss rate were also analyzed.

RESULTS

From a total of 2009 LA, 18 (0.9%) were included in G1 and 36 (1.8%) in G2. There were no intraoperative complications or converted surgeries. Length of hospital stay was longer in G1 (G1: 2.6 vs G2: 1.4 days, p < 0.01). There was no difference in overall morbidity and readmission rates. Fetal loss and preterm delivery rates were both 11%.

CONCLUSION

LA in pregnant women has similar intraoperative and postoperative outcomes as those achieved in non-pregnant patients. In addition, the laparoscopic approach does not seem to jeopardize obstetrical outcomes.

Updated Evaluation of Laparoscopic vs. Open Appendicectomy During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To explore the updated evaluation about the obstetrical and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) for pregnancy appendicitis compared with open appendicectomy (OA). Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to screen eligible studies up to December 2020. Only clinical researches, no < 10 cases for LA and OA group were included. Twenty retrospective studies with 7,248 pregnant women, evaluating LA and OA in surgical and obstetrical outcomes, were included. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI and odds ratio (OR) was used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables. It seems LA was connected with significantly shorter hospital time and lower wound infection [mean difference (MD), −0.57 days; 95% CI, −0.96 to −0.18; p = 0.004 and OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.62; p = 0.0005, respectively]. The incidence of fetal loss after LA was higher than OA (OR,1.93; 95% CI, 1.39–2.69; p < 0.0001). It was almost similar in the rate of preterm delivery (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.34; p = 0.40) and other perioperative and obstetrical complications (p > 0.05). Our results indicated that the occurrence of fetal loss after LA should not be ignored. Caution, skillful operation, and thoroughly informed consent about the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy are necessary.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021233150.

Systematic review of Meckel's diverticulum in pregnancy

INTRODUCTION

Meckel's diverticulum (MD) is the most common congenital malformation in the gastrointestinal tract. Limited up-to-date evidence is available regarding MD in pregnancy. We aim to review the available pertinent literature to help support clinical decision making and patient management in the future.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The search term 'Meckel's diverticulum' was combined with 'pregnant' or 'pregnancy'. Database searches of EMBASE, Medline and PubMed were conducted. All papers published in English from 01/01/1990 to 01/01/2021 were included. Simple statistical analysis (t-test) was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven cases were included. Average age = 26.9 years. Average gestation = 25.1 weeks. Occurrence: first trimester = 3.7%; second trimester = 48.1% and third trimester = 48.1%. Presenting symptoms: abdominal pain 88.9%; nausea/vomiting 59.3%; fever 18.5%; abdominal distension 18.5%; haematochezia 11.1%; constipation 11.1%; haematemesis 3.7%, diarrhoea 3.7% and asymptomatic 3.7%. Mean duration of preceding symptoms = 3.4 days. Diagnostic imaging modalities utilised: ultrasound = 40.7%; CT = 25.9%; MRI = 14.8%; abdominal X-ray = 11.1% and endoscopy = 7.4%. All cases required definite surgical management: laparotomy = 65.4%; laparoscopy = 15.4%; C-section = 19.2% and unreported = 3.8%. Main intra-operative findings: perforated MD = 40.7%; intussusception with MD as a lead point = 11.1%; bleeding MD = 11.1%, inflamed MD = 11.1%; small bowel obstruction = 11.1%; gangrenous MD = 3.7%; volvulus = 3.7% and unspecified = 7.4%. Mean length from ileocolic junction = 51.7 cm. Average length of stay was 7.1 days. T-test (p-value = 0.12) when comparing management strategy. Three maternal complications and two foetal mortalities.

CONCLUSION

MD and associated pathology are difficult to diagnose in the pregnant cohort. Current imaging demonstrates low diagnostic accuracy and a deviation away from recognised nuclear medicine investigations. Surgery appears the definitive management with both open and laparoscopic approaches utilised. Significant maternal morbidity and foetal mortality are associated with this condition.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy for Appendicitis in Pregnancy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The clinical safety, efficacy and feasibility of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) compared with open appendectomy (OA) in pregnancy are still controversial. Herein, we are aiming to compare the clinical outcomes of LA and OA in patients with acute appendicitis during their pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and OA in pregnancy identifying using PubMed, Web of science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Ovid and Scopus. Two independent reviewers extracted data on surgical complication, fetal loss, preterm delivery, hospital stay, Apgar score in both groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies with total of 6497 patients (4464 in open and 2031 in laparoscopic group) were included. LA was associated with lower rate of wound infection [odds risk (OR)=3.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.77-5.56, P<0.0001] overall complications (OR=2.15, 95% CI: 1.47-3.14, P<0.0001) and shorter hospitalization (mean difference=0.72, 95% CI: 0.43-1.02, P<0.00001) compared with open group. LA was in a lower risk for 5-minute Apgar score (mean difference=0.09, 95% CI: 0.02-0.17, P=0.01) group than open group. No difference was found regarding preterm delivery between 2 groups. LA was associated with higher fetal loss (OR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.79, P=0.0007) compared with open surgery. However, laparoscopy was not associated with increased fetal loss after 2010 (OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.44-1.24, P=0.26) compared with open group.

CONCLUSIONS

LA in pregnancy seems to be feasible with acceptable outcome, especially in patients with early and mid-trimester period, with sophisticated hands and experienced centers.

Evaluation of safety and foeto-maternal outcome following non-obstetric surgery in pregnancy: a retrospective single-site Australian study

BACKGROUND

Existing data on safety of non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy appear limited and conflicting. This study aimed to assess perinatal outcomes and complications in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgeries.

METHODS

A single-site Australian study was performed utilizing a 10-year data (2009-2018) collected retrospectively. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the characteristics of the study population. Statistical analyses between groups were conducted by independent t-test or Mann-Whitney (for means between groups) and by chi-squared/Fisher's exact test (for categorical variables).

RESULTS

A total of 108 pregnant women underwent non-obstetric surgery, with an increasing trend in annual numbers since 2014. The majority of women (91%) underwent surgeries as an emergency procedure, and under general anaesthesia (69.8%). Procedures during the first trimester comprised 45%, making it the most common trimester for non-obstetric surgeries. The most common cause for surgery arose in the gastrointestinal/digestive tract (39%). Overall perinatal complication rate was 19% with the rate of miscarriage/foetal loss, preterm birth and intrauterine growth restriction/small for gestational age being 4.7%, 10.4% and 3.8%, respectively. A total of 46 patients underwent intra-abdominal surgery. The most common surgery in the laparoscopy group was appendicectomy (56%), whereas adnexal pathology (54%) contributed to the majority of laparotomies. Subgroup comparison showed no significant difference in perinatal outcomes except for caesarean delivery rate (24% versus 67% for laparoscopy versus open, respectively (P = 0.04)).

CONCLUSION

With an overall perinatal complication rate of 19%, the rate of adverse perinatal outcomes following non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy in our study was low and comparable to those of the general population.

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

Objective: Clinically suspected appendicitis is the most common nonobstetric surgical problem encountered in pregnancy. The diagnosis of appendicitis is hampered by equivocal symptoms during pregnancy. Ultrasonography (US) remains, as a rule, the imaging test of choice for the diagnosis of clinically suspected appendicitis during pregnancy and other imaging tools such as computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are usually avoided. We evaluated the accuracy of US in the diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy.Methods: The clinical and sonographic findings of all pregnant women (n = 90), who underwent appendectomy between January 2005 and December 2017 at our institution, were retrospectively reviewed, analyzed, and compared to the clinical and sonographic findings similarly obtained for a control group of nonpregnant women matched for age and date of surgery (±6 months). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ultrasonic findings were calculated and compared between groups as well as within the three pregnancy trimesters.Results: The mean age of the patients was 31.3 ± 0.4. Right lower quadrant pain was present in almost all patients (99%). The sole imaging modality used in our study cohort was US. Among nonpregnant controls, CT scan was primarily used on more occasions (53.3%) compared to US (45.6%). Nonpregnant women underwent significantly more laparoscopies compared to pregnant women (83.3 versus 45.6%, p < .001). The rate of negative appendectomy was higher in pregnant women (31.1 versus 10%, p = .002). Among pregnant women operated there was a higher rate of inconclusive or negative imaging (43.3 versus 11.1%, p < .001). The rate of perforated appendix at surgery was similar in both groups (6.7 and 4.4%, respectively, p = .75).Conclusions: Ultrasonography (US) is of mediocre accuracy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients beyond the first trimester of pregnancy. Thirty percent of pregnant women with suspected appendicitis are futilely operated. Given the low yield of US, a second-line imaging should be considered in cases of inconclusive US before surgery.

Laparoscopic appendectomy is safe and feasible in pregnant women during second trimester: A retrospective study in a top-level Chinese center

Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common nonobstetric surgical emergency during pregnancy. According to the current guidelines and meta-analyses, traditional open appendectomy (OA) is still recommended for pregnant patients over laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), which might be associated with higher rates of fetal loss. Previous studies and experiences indicated that LA might be safe in the second trimester of pregnancy. The current study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LA in pregnant women during the second trimester.At our institution, a retrospective study was conducted with pregnant patients who underwent LA or OA during the second trimester between January 2016 and August 2018.A total of 48 patients were enrolled. Of them, 12 were managed with laparoscopy and 36 with the open approach. We found that the LA group had higher BMIs than the OA group (4.0 ± 4.3 vs 21.5 ± 2.9, P = .031). The financial results showed that the average daily medical costs for patients who underwent LA was higher than those who underwent OA (444 ± 107 US$ vs 340 ± 115 US$, P = .009), while the total cost of hospitalization was comparable between the 2 approaches. The perioperative and obstetric outcomes were comparable between LA and OA. In each group, only 1 patient had fetal loss. No "Yinao" was found in any of the patients in the LA group.In this study, with the proven advantages of the laparoscopic techniques, LA was found to be safe and feasible for pregnant women during the second trimester.

[Acute appendicitis during pregnancy]

Acute appendicitis is the most frequent surgical disease complicating pregnancy. Accurate diagnosis is difficult due to atypical and misleading clinical manifestations. Surgeons frequently do not know about advantages and disadvantages of different diagnostic methods applied during pregnancy. Treatment of acute appendicitis in pregnant women remains the real challenge for surgeons. There are enough researches indicating on benefits and risks of both open and laparoscopic operations. The main risk is due to fetal loss after laparoscopic procedure. Safety of diagnostic techniques and laparoscopic procedures, surgical tactics and independent risk factors of pregnancy loss are touched in the article.

[Complicated appendicitis during pregnancy]

AIM

To analyze incidence, diagnosis and treatment of complicated appendicitis in pregnant women and to determine the optimal surgical approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis included 338 pregnant women who underwent appendectomy in 2012-2016. Complicated appendicitis (abscess, local or common peritonitis and their combinations) was diagnosed in 22 cases. The main perioperative variables (duration of the disease, time of surgery, length of hospital-stay, incidence of wound complications, etc.), clinical and laboratory symptoms, results of ultrasound diagnosis and pregnancy outcomes were analyzed. Statistical analysis was carried out in Stata 14.2. Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon's U-test and multivariate regression analysis were used to compare data.

RESULTS

The incidence of complicated appendicitis in pregnant women was 6.51%. There are no clinical symptoms which would be significantly more common in complicated appendicitis during pregnancy. Complicated course prolongs surgery and hospital-stay, however duration of postoperative analgesia depends on surgical technique as a rule. There were 27% of laparoscopic interventions that is lower compared with women with uncomplicated appendicitis. The percentage of conversions was higher too.

CONCLUSION

Clinical diagnosis of complicated appendicitis during pregnancy even by using of ultrasound is not satisfactory and requires the involvement of other objective methods, such as MRI. Laparoscopic intervention is not contraindicated in pregnant women with complicated appendicitis and determine better treatment outcomes than open surgery.

Is the laparoscopic approach a safe choice for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnant women? A meta-analysis of observational studies

INTRODUCTION

Acute appendicitis is a common and serious situation during pregnancy, because of the increased risk of fetal loss and perforation in the third trimester, as well as a diagnostic difficulty. During recent years laparoscopic approach has been introduced to clinical practice with encouraging results. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the surgical and obstetrical outcomes between laparoscopic and open appendectomy during pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting on postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open appendectomy during pregnancy. The random effects model (DerSimonian-Laird) was used to calculate pooled effect estimates when high heterogeneity was encountered, otherwise the fixed-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model was implemented.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies that enrolled 6276 pregnant women are included in the present meta-analysis. Of these women, 1963 underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and 4313 underwent an open appendectomy. Women who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy demonstrated an increase in fetal loss risk, while neonates of women that underwent open appendectomy presented decreased Apgar score at five minutes after birth. All the rest outcomes were similar between the two groups. The time that each study took place seemed to affect the comparison of birth weight and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy seems to be a relatively safe therapeutic option in pregnancy when it is indicated. Thus, it should be implemented in clinical practice, always considering the experience of the surgeon in such procedures. Nevertheless, the need of new studies to enhance this statement remains crucial.

Safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common non-obstetric surgical presentation during pregnancy. There were concerns that laparoscopic appendicectomy increases the risk of foetal loss compared to an open approach. Therefore, with recent advances in perioperative care, it is likely the risk has changed. Here, we performed an updated meta-analysis assessing the safety of laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnant women.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was undertaken between 2000 and 2017 on Ovid Medline and Embase. The primary outcome measures were foetal loss and preterm delivery, whereas secondary outcome measures were operative time and hospital length of stay. A random-effect model was performed to pool odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

Seventeen observational studies were included, with 1886 patients in the laparoscopic and 4261 patients in the open group. Comparing laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy, there were 54 (5.96%) and 136 (3.73%) foetal losses, respectively. However, preterm delivery was much higher in the open approach (8.99%) compared to laparoscopic approach (2.84%). Pooled OR for foetal loss was 1.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-2.58, P < 0.001), whereas OR for preterm delivery was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27-0.55, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both approaches for operative time (SMD -0.07; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.30, P = 0.71) or hospital length of stay (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.83 to 0.16, P = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

In a pooled analysis of level III evidence, laparoscopic appendicectomy posed a higher risk of foetal loss but lower risk of preterm delivery. Caution and informed consent are crucial when offering a laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Pregnancy With Acute Appendicitis: Single Center Experience With World Review

OBJECTIVES

This clinical study is aiming to discuss the therapeutic benefit of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) by comparing with conventional open appendectomy (OA) in pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical data of 26 pregnant women who underwent appendectomy from 2012 to 2016 was retrospectively analyzed. The variables analyzed included baseline information, operation characteristics, maternal complications, and infant health outcomes. The patients were divided in 2 LA and OA groups according to the surgical approach and their clinical characteristics were compared.

RESULTS

Of reported 26 patients, 7 underwent LA whereas the remaining 19 patients underwent OA. The median age of the patients was 28 years (range, 19 to 39 y). The median gestational period was 21.5 weeks (range, 5 to 33 wk). The postoperative pathology showed complicated appendicitis 7 cases. The result showed significantly shorter operation time (42.14±8.63 vs. 65.21±26.58 min, P=0.003), hospital stay (4.14±1.77 vs. 6.47±2.72 d, P=0.021), and earlier recovery of gastrointestinal function in the LA group compared with OA group. There were no maternal and fetal deaths occurred in perioperative period in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LA has not increased morbidity and mortality but displayed shorter hospital stay, operation time and recovery of gastrointestinal function to OA as well as good cosmetic results. Therefore, LA in patients with pregnancy can be considered as preferred approach in sophisticated hands without increased risks.

Outcomes after open and laparoscopic appendectomy during pregnancy: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Acute appendicitis is the most prevalent cause of non-obstetrical surgical disease during pregnancy. There is no consensus on the optimal surgical management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Our aim is to identify surgical and obstetrical outcomes of laparoscopic (LA) and open approach (OA) in pregnant patients with acute appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for articles published up to May 2017, along with the references of all articles. Prospective and retrospective trials reporting outcomes among pregnant women undergoing laparoscopic and open appendectomy were included. Of the 493 records screened, 20 were eligible for meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Statistical meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6210 pregnant women from twenty studies were included in meta-analysis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with significantly lower overall complication rates and shorter hospital stays (1835 patients OR 0.48 95% CI 0.29, 0.80 p = 0.005). While the open appendectomy group showed prolongation of gestational age for term deliveries, laparoscopic appendectomy patients had higher rates of fetal loss (543 patients MD -0.46 weeks 95% CI-0.87 to -0.04, p = 0.03 and 4867 patients OR 1.82 95% CI 1.30 to 2.57, p = 0.0006, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature remains inconclusive on the optimal approach of appendectomy in pregnant women. Further larger-volume studies are needed in order to elucidate the critical effect of laparoscopic appendectomy on fetal loss rates.