-
Annals of Surgery Aug 2017We compared the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy across the world and evaluated temporal trends. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
We compared the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy across the world and evaluated temporal trends.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
Population-based studies reported the incidence of appendicitis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for population-based studies reporting the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy. Time trends were explored using Poisson regression and reported as annual percent change (APC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). APC were stratified by time periods and pooled using random effects models. Incidence since 2000 was pooled for regions in the Western world.
RESULTS
The search retrieved 10,247 citations with 120 studies reporting on the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy. During the 21st century the pooled incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy (in per 100,000 person-years) was 100 (95% CI: 91, 110) in Northern America, and the estimated number of cases in 2015 was 378,614. The pooled incidence ranged from 105 in Eastern Europe to 151 in Western Europe. In Western countries, the incidence of appendectomy steadily decreased since 1990 (APC after 1989=-1.54; 95% CI: -2.22, -0.86), whereas the incidence of appendicitis stabilized (APC=-0.36; 95% CI: -0.97, 0.26) for both perforated (APC=0.95; 95% CI: -0.25, 2.17) and nonperforated appendicitis (APC=0.44; 95% CI: -0.84, 1.73). In the 21st century, the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy is high in newly industrialized countries in Asia (South Korea pooled: 206), the Middle East (Turkey pooled: 160), and Southern America (Chile: 202).
CONCLUSIONS
Appendicitis is a global disease. The incidence of appendicitis is stable in most Western countries. Data from newly industrialized countries is sparse, but suggests that appendicitis is rising rapidly.
Topics: Africa; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Asia; Australia; Europe; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Middle East; North America; Oceania; South America
PubMed: 28288060
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002188 -
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care... Jun 2017Acute appendicitis continues to constitute a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this study was to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis continues to constitute a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this study was to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nonoperative versus surgical management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adult patients.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases was performed with respect to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement (end-of-search date: January 29, 2017). Data on the study design, interventions, participants, and outcomes were extracted by two independent reviewers. The random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird) was used to calculate pooled effect estimates when substantial heterogeneity was encountered; otherwise, the fixed-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model was implemented. Quality assessment of included RCTs was performed using the modified Jadad scale.
RESULTS
Five RCTs were included in this review. Overall, 1,430 adult patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis underwent either nonoperative (n = 727) or operative management (n = 703). Treatment efficacy at 1-year follow-up was significantly lower (63.8%) for antibiotics compared with the surgery group (93%) (risk ratio [RR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.77; p < 0.001). Overall complications were significantly higher in the surgery group (166/703 [23.6%]) compared with the antibiotics group (56/727 [7.7%]) (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.24-0.43; p < 0.001). No difference was found between the two treatment modalities in terms of perforated appendicitis rates (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.14-1.92), length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.20; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.56), duration of pain (WMD, 0.22; 95% CI, -5.30 to -5.73), and sick leave (WMD, -2; 95% CI, -5.2 to 1.1).
CONCLUSIONS
Conservative management of uncomplicated appendicitis in adults warrants further study. Addressing patients' expectations via a shared decision-making process is a crucial step in optimizing nonoperative outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Systematic review, level II.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28338596
DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001450 -
The American Surgeon Jan 2016Patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon have been traditionally managed with antibiotics and radiologically guided drainage of the abscess. Many studies have... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon have been traditionally managed with antibiotics and radiologically guided drainage of the abscess. Many studies have questioned the need for interval appendectomy. A systematic review of the nonsurgical treatment of patients with an appendiceal abscess or phlegmon was undertaken. The rate of recurrence after nonsurgical management, morbidity and length of hospital stay was measured. PubMed and Cochrane databases were queried to identify 21 studies reporting the morbidity of nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal phlegmon or abscess, and five studies reporting the morbidity of performing interval appendectomy. Repeat nonsurgical management was compared with that of performing interval appendectomy. The studies included a total of 1943 patients, of which 1400 patients were managed nonsurgically and 543 patients underwent interval appendectomy. Nonoperative treatment had a mean recurrence of 12.4 per cent, a morbidity of 13.3 per cent, and the length of hospital stay was 9.6 days. The mean morbidity rate and length of hospital stay for patients who underwent interval appendectomy was 10.4 per cent and 5.0 days, respectively. Interval appendectomy and repeat nonoperative management in case of recurrence are associated with similar morbidity; however, elective interval appendectomy implies additional operative costs to prevent recurrence in one of eight patients.
Topics: Abscess; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Cellulitis; Drainage; Female; Humans; Male; Prognosis; Recurrence; Risk Assessment; Treatment Outcome; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 26802841
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Aug 2017To compare the risk of complications between initial nonoperative treatment and appendectomy of uncomplicated (simple) appendicitis in children. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
To compare the risk of complications between initial nonoperative treatment and appendectomy of uncomplicated (simple) appendicitis in children.
METHODS
Systematic literature search. Eligible for inclusion were both and randomized controlled trials and cohort studies including children in which the outcome of nonoperative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis was reported with a minimum follow-up period of one year. Two authors extracted data independently and assessed quality. Primary outcome parameter was the percentage of children experiencing complications. Secondary outcomes were early failures, recurrent appendicitis and appendectomies, for all indications and on request.
RESULTS
Five of the 2051 articles screened were eligible for inclusion, including 147 children (nonoperative treatment) and 173 children (appendectomy) with one year follow-up. Percentage of children experiencing complications ranged from 0 to 13% versus 0-17% for nonoperative and appendectomy, respectively. Nonoperative treatment avoided an appendectomy in 62-81% of the children after one year follow-up.
CONCLUSION
The evidence base for initial nonoperative treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children is by far insufficient. It suggests that the percentage of patients experiencing complications in the initial nonoperative treatment group is comparable to the appendectomy group, and it may avoid an appendectomy in the large majority of children after one year follow-up.
TYPE OF STUDY
Systematic review.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
1.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Child; Female; Humans; Male; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28449821
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.04.005 -
Cureus Jan 2024Appendectomy remains the gold standard for treating appendicitis, but advancements in laparoscopic techniques have shifted the paradigm. Natural orifice transluminal... (Review)
Review
Appendectomy remains the gold standard for treating appendicitis, but advancements in laparoscopic techniques have shifted the paradigm. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and transvaginal appendectomy (TVA) offer a potentially less invasive alternative to traditional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). This article systematically reviews the procedures, perceptions, and complications of TVA to assess its viability as a surgical option. Between January 1, 2003, and November 1, 2023, 4832 case reports, case series, and experimental and observational peer-reviewed publications were examined and filtered using the keyword "Transvaginal Laparoscopic Appendectomy." The publications were screened using PRISMA guidelines, and 20 studies were included for analysis and review. Survey results showed that women's acceptance of TVA was 43%, citing reduced invasiveness as a major reason for positive reception. TVA procedures exhibited consistency, with variations in appendectomy methods, appendix removal, and posterior fornix incision closure. Positive outcomes included shorter operation times, reduced postoperative pain, and minimal scarring. Complications were uncommon but included bladder puncture, urinary tract infections, and intra-abdominal abscesses. Indications primarily focused on surgical safety, reduced scarring, and postoperative benefits. Sexual function post-TVA exhibited no significant differences in most cases, with a recovery period of two to four weeks. This systematic review suggests that TVA is a promising alternative to traditional LA, offering potential advantages in terms of postoperative complications. While the existing literature indicates positive outcomes, further research with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-ups is needed to validate the efficacy and safety of TVA and assess how the procedure impacts the reproductive function of patients.
PubMed: 38333466
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51962 -
Journal of Clinical Ultrasound : JCU 2023The accuracy of ultrasound in the detection of appendicitis in pregnant women was examined in a meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Pregnant Women; Appendicitis; Ultrasonography; Sensitivity and Specificity; ROC Curve; Acute Disease
PubMed: 37747110
DOI: 10.1002/jcu.23566 -
The American Surgeon Jun 2023Acute appendicitis is one of the most common etiologies of an acute abdomen in the emergency department and first-line standard surgical care for the condition has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis is one of the most common etiologies of an acute abdomen in the emergency department and first-line standard surgical care for the condition has recently been reconsidered. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness and outcomes of surgical intervention versus non-operative antibiotic therapy in the treatment of acute appendicitis in adult and pediatric patients.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE. The search included all studies until January 15th, 2022. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Data were independently extracted by the authors of the study. Meta-analysis was performed and Cohen's Q test for heterogeneous effects was performed to determine if fixed or random-effects models were appropriate for use.
RESULTS
Twelve randomized controlled trials investigating a total of 3703 acute appendicitis patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. In the systematic review, eleven RCTs demonstrated that appendectomy had improved effectiveness compared to non-operative antibiotic management. The meta-analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing appendectomy had significantly higher treatment effectiveness compared with antibiotics-only treatment (98.4% vs. 73.3%, < .0001). The meta-analysis did demonstrate a significant .54-day reduction in hospital length of stay for the appendectomy group compared to the non-operative antibiotic therapy group.
CONCLUSIONS
Surgical intervention is associated with increased effectiveness of treatment and reduced in-hospital length of stay among patients with acute appendicitis. Guidelines established by institutions and surgical organizations should indicate appendectomy as the standard and superior treatment option for patients presenting with acute appendicitis.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Acute Disease
PubMed: 35818927
DOI: 10.1177/00031348221114045 -
Journal of the West African College of... 2017The known complications of appendicitis include perforated appendicitis with generalised peritonitis, appendiceal mass, appendiceal abscess, sepsis, adhesion formation... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The known complications of appendicitis include perforated appendicitis with generalised peritonitis, appendiceal mass, appendiceal abscess, sepsis, adhesion formation and in a few occasions, small bowel intestinal obstruction.
AIM
To review published cases of intestinal obstruction due to appendicitis with a view to better understand the pathophysiology of this complication.
METHODOLOGY
A search of the literature in the MEDLINE database, using PubMed and OvidSP, Scopus, Google Scholar and Cochrane Databases with the following MeSH terms: was done. Also, these searches were restricted according to the following MeSH limits: (a) January 1, 1950 to July 31, 2016, (b) English articles (c) Human.
RESULTS
Overall, 27 articles reported 45 patients with intestinal obstruction due to appendicitis. Of the 30 (66.7%) patients that the gender was indicated, 22 (48.9%) were male while 8 (17.8%) were female. In 38 (84.4%) cases the cause was mechanical obstruction resulting from one or a combination of the following: (a) appendix laid across loops of bowel bound down by adhesions, (b) herniation through a ring or gap formed by the appendix tip being attached to its base, (c) appendix tip attached to the bowel causing a torsion, (d) kinking of the bowel, (e) complex knotting. Pre-operative diagnosis was a major challenge and so, none was approached through incision based on the McBurney's point.The outcome of treatment which was mostly achieved by immediate appendectomy followed by adhesiolysis was sufficient and often gave good results.
CONCLUSION
This study has shown that appendicitis is an important cause of intestinal obstruction. Even though pre-operative diagnosis is still a major challenge, clinical evaluation and a high index of suspicion are key to diagnosis.
PubMed: 30525005
DOI: No ID Found -
Cureus Nov 2022This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of drain insertion versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis. A systematic search... (Review)
Review
This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of drain insertion versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus was conducted, and all studies comparing drain versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis were included. Abdominal collection, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, faecal fistula, paralytic ileus, length of hospital stay (LOS) and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Seventeen studies reporting a total number of 4,255 patients who underwent appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis with (n=1,580) or without (n=2,657) drain were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding abdominal collection (odds ratio (OR)=1.41, P=0.13). No-drain group was superior to the drain group regarding SSI (OR=1.93, P=0.0001), faecal fistula (OR=4.76, P=0.03), intestinal obstruction (OR=2.40, P=0.04) and paralytic ileus (OR=2.07, P=0.01). There was a difference regarding mortality rate between the two groups (3.4% in the drain group vs 0.5% in the no-drain group, risk difference (RD)=0.01, 95% CI (-0.01, 0.04), P=0.36). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has shown that drains have no effect on the development of intra-abdominal collections in complicated appendicitis, but it can significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications such as fistula, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, ileus and length of hospital stay.
PubMed: 36600842
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32018 -
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine 2022COVID-19 has affected the pattern of referral to medical centers and quarantine against COVID-19 might delay referral and management of surgical emergencies. This study... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
COVID-19 has affected the pattern of referral to medical centers and quarantine against COVID-19 might delay referral and management of surgical emergencies. This study aimed to compare the pooled event rate of pediatric perforated appendicitis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis study based on the PRISMA guidelines. Scopus, Web of Sciences, and PubMed databases were searched for studies reporting the rate of perforated appendicitis based on the post-appendectomy observations or imaging methods. The Egger bias test and funnel plot were used to detect and depict publication bias. Statistical analysis was performed in Comprehensive Meta-analysis package version 3.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were eligible for inclusion in our study. The pooled prevalence of pediatric perforated appendicitis in the pre-COVID era was 28.5% (CI95%: 28.3 to 28.7%) with a heterogeneity of 99%. In the COVID era, the event rate proportion was 39.4% (CI95%: 36.6 to 42.3%) with a heterogeneity of 99%. There was a significant difference in the subgroup analysis within the pre-COVID and COVID era (P<0.001), showing a higher perforation rate in the COVID era.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate of perforated appendicitis has significantly increased in comparison to before the COVID-19 pandemic.
PubMed: 35072092
DOI: 10.22037/aaem.v10i1.1421