-
Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health Nov 2017Acute appendicitis is the most common reason for abdominal surgery in children. Luminal obstruction of the appendix progresses to suppurative inflammation and... (Review)
Review
Acute appendicitis is the most common reason for abdominal surgery in children. Luminal obstruction of the appendix progresses to suppurative inflammation and perforation, which causes generalised peritonitis or an appendix mass/abscess. Classical features include periumbilical pain that migrates to the right iliac fossa, anorexia, fever, and tenderness and guarding in the right iliac fossa. Atypical presentations are particularly common in preschool children. A clinical diagnosis is possible in most cases, after a period of active observation if necessary; inflammatory markers and an ultrasound scan are useful investigations when the diagnosis is uncertain. Treatment is by appendicectomy after appropriate fluid resuscitation, analgesia and intravenous antibiotics. Laparoscopic appendicectomy is better than open appendicectomy in most cases because it is associated with less postoperative pain and a shorter hospital stay, but recovery after acute appendicitis is mostly dictated by whether the appendix was perforated or not. Management of the appendix mass remains controversial and not all affected children need an interval appendicectomy. This article discusses tips and pitfalls in diagnosis and addresses many of the controversies that surround the management of this condition.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Acute Disease; Adolescent; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Appendix; Child; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male
PubMed: 29044790
DOI: 10.1111/jpc.13737 -
JAAPA : Official Journal of the... Sep 2018Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Of the 300,000 appendectomies performed each year, 25% are due to complicated appendicitis. This... (Review)
Review
Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Of the 300,000 appendectomies performed each year, 25% are due to complicated appendicitis. This article reviews the incidence and pathophysiology of acute appendicitis, the nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis, and the rationales for and against interval appendectomy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Conservative Treatment; Humans; Incidence
PubMed: 30153202
DOI: 10.1097/01.JAA.0000544304.30954.40 -
Lancet (London, England) Oct 2023Appendicectomy remains the standard treatment for appendicitis. No international consensus exists on the surgical urgency for acute uncomplicated appendicitis, and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Role of preoperative in-hospital delay on appendiceal perforation while awaiting appendicectomy (PERFECT): a Nordic, pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
Appendicectomy remains the standard treatment for appendicitis. No international consensus exists on the surgical urgency for acute uncomplicated appendicitis, and recommendations vary from surgery without delay to surgery within 24 h. Longer in-hospital delay has been thought to increase the risk of perforation and further morbidity. Therefore, we aimed to compare the rate of appendiceal perforation in patients undergoing appendicectomy scheduled to two different urgencies (<8 h vs <24 h).
METHODS
In this pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial in two hospitals in Finland and one in Norway, patients (aged ≥18 years) with presumed uncomplicated acute appendicitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to an appendicectomy scheduled within 8 h or within 24 h to determine whether longer in-hospital delay (time between randomisation and surgical incision) is not inferior to shorter delay. Patients were excluded in cases of pregnancy, suspicion of perforated appendicitis (C-reactive protein level of ≥100 mg/L, fever >38·5°C, signs of complicated appendicitis on imaging studies, or clinical generalised peritonitis), or other reasons requiring prompt surgery. The recruiters were on-duty surgeons who decided to proceed with the appendicectomy. The randomisation sequence was generated using block randomisation with randomly varying block sizes and stratified by hospital districts; neither physicians nor patients were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was perforated appendicitis diagnosed during surgery analysed in all patients who received an appendicectomy by intention to treat. The absolute difference in rates of perforated appendicitis was compared between the groups. Complications and other safety outcomes were analysed in all patients who received an appendicectomy. A margin of 5 percentage points was used to establish non-inferiority. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04378868) and is closed to accrual.
FINDINGS
Between May 18, 2020, and Dec 31, 2022, 2095 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 1822 were randomly assigned to appendicectomy scheduled within 8 h (n=914) or 24 h (n=908). After randomisation, 19 (1%) of 1822 patients were excluded due to protocol violation. 1803 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analyses, 985 (55%) of whom were male and 818 (45%) female. Appendiceal perforation rate was similar between groups (77 [8%] of 907 patients assigned to the <8 h group and 81 [9%] of 896 patients assigned to the <24 h group; absolute risk difference 0·6% [95% CI -2·1 to 3·2], p=0·68; risk ratio 1·065, 95% CI 0·790 to 1·435). No significant difference was found between the complication rates within 30 days (66 [7%] of 907 patients in the <8 h group vs 56 [6%] of 896 patients in the <24 h group; difference -1·0% [-3·3 to 1·3]; p=0·39), and no deaths occurred during this follow-up period.
INTERPRETATION
In patients with presumed uncomplicated acute appendicitis, scheduling appendicectomy within 24 h does not increase the risk of appendiceal perforation compared with scheduling appendicectomy within 8 h. The results can be used to allocate operating room resources, for example postponing night-time appendicectomy to daytime.
FUNDING
The Finnish Medical Foundation, Mary and Georg Ehrnrooth's Foundation, Biomedicum Helsinki Foundation, and the Finnish Government.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Acute Disease; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Finland; Hospitals
PubMed: 37717589
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01311-9 -
The Surgical Clinics of North America Feb 2017Appendicitis is one of the most common surgical pathologies in children. It can present with right lower quadrant pain. Scoring systems in combination with selective... (Review)
Review
Appendicitis is one of the most common surgical pathologies in children. It can present with right lower quadrant pain. Scoring systems in combination with selective imaging and surgical examination will diagnose most children with appendicitis. Clinical pathways should be used. Most surgical interventions for appendicitis are now almost exclusively laparoscopic, with trials demonstrating better outcomes for children who undergo index hospitalization appendectomies when perforated. Nonoperative management has a role in the treatment of both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. This article discusses the workup and management, modes of treatment, and continued areas of controversy in pediatric appendicitis.
Topics: Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Child; Humans; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 27894435
DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2016.08.009 -
World Journal of Surgery Apr 2023Save for the contribution of Charles McBurney, who described his eponymous point and the appendicectomy incision, the history of appendicectomy is largely unknown among... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Save for the contribution of Charles McBurney, who described his eponymous point and the appendicectomy incision, the history of appendicectomy is largely unknown among the medical profession. This review traces the history from the first anatomical depiction of the appendix to the development of open appendicectomy and the recent minimally invasive and non-operative methods.
METHODS
Historical articles, monographs and books containing anatomical descriptions of the vermiform appendix and reports of appendicitis and its surgical treatment were retrieved after searching the PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase databases from their inception to 31 March 2022.
RESULTS
The first inadvertent appendicectomy was performed during an operation for a groin hernia by Cookesley in 1731, and Mestivier was the first to drain a right iliac fossa abscess, due to appendicitis, in 1757. Krönlein performed the first appendicectomy for acute appendicitis in 1884 but his patient died. The first successful appendicectomy for acute appendicitis leading to patient survival was by Morton in 1887. In 1976, Wirschafter and Kaufman performed an inadvertent colonoscopic appendicectomy and, in 1980, Semm carried out the first laparoscopic appendicectomy. The first appendicectomy via a natural orifice (transgastric) appendicectomy was by Rao and Reddy in 2004.
CONCLUSION
This historical review charts the development of surgical knowledge concerning the management of appendicitis, from the first anatomical drawings of the appendix and descriptions of appendicitis to the development of surgical and conservative treatments up to the present day. It also corrects some inaccuracies of attribution in previous historical reviews.
Topics: Humans; Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Appendix; Acute Disease; Abscess; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 36581691
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06874-6 -
Pediatric Surgery International May 2023Stump appendicitis is a rare complication after primary appendectomy and is often not considered in the differential diagnosis of patients who have undergone an... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stump appendicitis is a rare complication after primary appendectomy and is often not considered in the differential diagnosis of patients who have undergone an appendectomy. With this systematic review, the aim was to identify all cases of stump appendicitis in children in order to gain a better insight into the risk factors, clinical presentation, diagnostics, and treatment.
METHODS
Scopus and PubMed databases were searched. The search combinations used the following MeSH and free text terms: [(stump) OR (residual) OR (remaining) OR (retained) OR (recurrent)] AND (append*). Neither search filters nor text analysis tools were used. To be included, the report had to contain information about a patient between the age of 0 and 18 who was treated for stump appendicitis as a result of an inadequately performed appendectomy.
RESULTS
Out of the 19,976 articles, 29 of them, with a total of 34 cases, met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at the time of stump appendectomy was 13.32 ± 3.57 years, while the median time between primary and stump appendectomy was 7.5 (2.3 - 24.0) months. The ratio between boys and girls was 3.2: 1. Primary appendectomy was performed laparoscopically in a greater number of cases compared to the open approach (1.5: 1), and according to the available data, no higher proportion of complicated appendicitis was recorded during a primary appendectomy. The median duration of symptoms during stump appendicitis was 2 days, and in most cases, the pain was localized. Stump appendectomy in most cases was performed with an open approach, and in relation to the type of appendicitis, most of them were complicated. The mean value of the length of the stump was 2.79 ± 1.22 cm, and the smallest recorded length was 0.6 cm.
CONCLUSIONS
A non-specific clinical presentation with a history of appendectomy usually makes the diagnosis of stump appendicitis challenging for uninformed physicians, and due to untimely treatment, it usually results in complicated forms of stump appendicitis. Complete appendectomy remains the gold standard in the treatment of stump appendicitis.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Child; Infant; Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Postoperative Complications; Pain; Diagnosis, Differential; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 37188869
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-023-05475-1 -
Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal Nov 2023Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies. There has been an increasing use of robotic abdominal surgery. However, it remains underutilised in... (Review)
Review
Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies. There has been an increasing use of robotic abdominal surgery. However, it remains underutilised in emergency settings. This study aimed to systematically review robotic appendicectomy (RA) feasibility. A 20-year systematic review was performed, along with quality assessment. The research protocol was registered with PROSPERO. The search yielded 1,242 citations, including 9 articles. The mean quality score was 10.72 ± 2.56. The endpoints across the studies were rate of conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, blood loss and operative time. RA is a safe, feasible technique that can be performed in elective and emergency settings with minimal blood loss. The operative time and hospital stay were within acceptable limits. Robotic surgery's major drawback is its high cost and limited availability. Future studies evaluating RA with a focus on its application during emergencies and its cost-effectiveness are recommended.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Emergencies; Feasibility Studies; Appendectomy; Appendicitis
PubMed: 38090254
DOI: 10.18295/squmj.7.2023.043 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2014The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is... (Review)
Review
The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with less wound pain, less wound infection, a shorter hospital stay, and faster overall recovery when compared to the open appendectomy for uncomplicated cases. In the past two decades, the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of perforated appendicitis to take the advantages of minimally invasiveness has increased. This article reviewed the prevalence, approaches, safety disclaimers, perioperative and postoperative outcomes of the laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of patients with perforated appendicitis. Special issues including the conversion, interval appendectomy, laparoscopic approach for elderly or obese patient are also discussed to define the role of laparoscopic treatment for patients with perforated appendicitis.
Topics: Age Factors; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Health Care Costs; Humans; Laparoscopy; Obesity; Patient Selection; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25339821
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i39.14338 -
The British Journal of Surgery Jan 2015Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) represents one of the most significant innovations in surgery to emerge since the advent of laparoscopy. A decade... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) represents one of the most significant innovations in surgery to emerge since the advent of laparoscopy. A decade of progress with this approach has now been catalogued, and yet its clinical application remains controversial.
METHODS
A PubMed search was carried out for articles describing NOTES in both the preclinical and the clinical setting. Public perceptions and expert opinion regarding NOTES in the published literature were analysed carefully.
RESULTS
Two hundred relevant articles on NOTES were studied and the outcomes reviewed. A division between direct- and indirect-target NOTES was established. The areas with the most promising clinical application included direct-target NOTES, such as transanal total mesorectal excision and peroral endoscopic myotomy. The clinical experience with distant-target NOTES, such as for appendicectomy and cholecystectomy, showed feasibility; however, NOTES-specific morbidity was introduced and this represents an important limitation.
CONCLUSION
NOTES experimentation in the preclinical setting has increased substantially. There has also been a significant increase in the application of NOTES in humans in the past decade. Enthusiasm for NOTES should be tempered by the risk of incurring NOTES-specific morbidity. Surgeons should carefully consider patient preferences regarding this new minimally invasive option, as opinions are not unanimously supportive of NOTES. As technical limitations are overcome, the clinical application of NOTES is predicted to increase. It is paramount that, when this complex technique is performed on humans, it is applied judiciously by appropriately trained experts with outcomes recorded in a registry.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Appendectomy; Attitude of Health Personnel; Attitude to Health; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Clinical Competence; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery; Public Opinion; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 25627137
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9710 -
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Nov 2020Accumulation of aggregated α-synuclein from the enteric nervous system is believed to be involved in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease (PD). The appendix... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Accumulation of aggregated α-synuclein from the enteric nervous system is believed to be involved in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease (PD). The appendix contains abundant α-synuclein and lacks a blood-tissue barrier, suggesting that appendectomy might reduce α-synuclein aggregation, and therefore the risk of PD. Studies on this intriguing possibility have not come to consistent conclusions.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase (via Ovid), and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials were searched for studies published through February 20, 2019 on the potential relationship between appendectomy and PD. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the quality of included studies. Data were summarized as pooled effect sizes (RRs or SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), which were calculated using the inverse variance method and a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic and explored in subgroup analyses.
RESULTS
Of the 408 references screened, six studies involving 3,554,540 people were included eventually. Appendectomy did not significantly affect PD risk (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.20, I = 83.1%, P = 0.789) or delay its onset (SMD 0.21, 95% CI - 0.03 to 0.44, I = 43.4%, P = 0.083).
CONCLUSION
The available evidence suggests no protective effect of appendectomy against PD. Future studies should seek to clarify the role of inflammation, α-synuclein pathology and the gut-brain axis in PD pathogenesis.
Topics: Appendectomy; Brain; Humans; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 31538320
DOI: 10.1007/s40520-019-01354-9