-
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 -
Cureus Oct 2022Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical pathologies. Its diagnosis is often carried out based on clinical signs and symptoms, with additional... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical pathologies. Its diagnosis is often carried out based on clinical signs and symptoms, with additional minimally invasive tests (i.e., blood testing) done to support the diagnosis. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a relatively novel biomarker that is starting to be used by clinicians for patients admitted into hospitals with a variety of infections. Its level can be used to identify the presence of infection. The aim of this review is to assess how useful PCT is as a biomarker in supporting clinicians' assessment of patients with suspected appendicitis.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was carried out, yielding a total of 16 primary research papers deemed appropriate for appraisal.
RESULTS
The usefulness of PCT in aiding the diagnosis of AA depends on the severity of appendicitis. Patients who experience complicated appendicitis (CAA) such as perforation, gangrene, or necrosis have a significantly raised PCT level (p<0.05) compared to those with uncomplicated appendicitis (UAA) and a variety of other non-appendiceal intra-abdominal pathologies.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of PCT in UAA is weak, however, PCT was deemed useful in helping predict CAA, thus helping portray the severity of infection. This, in turn, will help ensure patients are taken to the operating theatre in a timely and safe manner for subsequent appendicectomy.
PubMed: 36407148
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.30292 -
Cureus Nov 2023Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in children and adolescents. The... (Review)
Review
Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in children and adolescents. The management of pain throughout the laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in the pediatric population is a critical concern. This study aimed to evaluate trends in analgesic use and patient satisfaction following LA, with a focus on reducing the reliance on opioids for pain management. From 2003 to 2023, 18258 articles were filtered for all types of analgesic use with LA. The publications were screened using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and 19 studies were included for analysis and review. The study included peer-reviewed experimental and observational studies involving individuals under 18 years. Pain management strategies varied across studies, involving a combination of analgesics, nerve blocks, and wound infiltrations. Analgesics such as acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids were administered before and after surgery. Some studies implemented patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pumps. Other studies explored non-pharmacological interventions like magnetic acupuncture. The results showed a reduction in the need for postoperative analgesics in patients treated with LA, particularly when using non-opioid medications and novel analgesic techniques. Pediatric patients who received gabapentin reported lower opioid use, shorter hospital stays, and high satisfaction rates. However, the reliance on opioids remained significant in some cases, particularly among patients with peritonitis who required more morphine. Pain management in pediatric patients is multifaceted, involving preoperative and postoperative analgesics, nerve blocks, and PCA pumps. Efforts to improve pain management following pediatric LA while reducing opioid reliance are essential in the context of the ongoing opioid epidemic. The findings from this study highlight the potential benefits of non-opioid analgesics, nerve blocks, and alternative methods for managing postoperative pain in <18 appendectomy patients. Further research and standardization of pain management protocols are needed to ensure optimal patient outcomes and minimize the risk of opioid-related complications.
PubMed: 38156159
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49581 -
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2022The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted volume, management strategies and patient outcomes of acute appendicitis. The aim of this systematic review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted volume, management strategies and patient outcomes of acute appendicitis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in higher incidence of complicated appendicitis in children presenting with acute appendicitis compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. The secondary aim was to investigate the proportion of the patients treated by non-operative management (NOM).
METHODS
A systematic search of four scientific databases was performed. The search terms used were (coronavirus OR SARS-CoV-2 OR COVID-19 OR novel coronavirus) AND (appendicitis). The inclusion criteria were all patients aged <18 years and diagnosed with acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 periods. The proportion of children presenting with complicated appendicitis and the proportion of children managed by NOM was compared between the two groups. The Downs and Black scale was used for methodological quality assessment.
RESULTS
The present meta-analysis included thirteen studies (twelve retrospective studies and one cross-sectional study). A total of 2782 patients (1239 during the COVID-19 period) were included. A significantly higher incidence of complicated appendicitis (RR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.33-2.01, < 0.00001) and a significantly higher proportion of children managed via the NOM (RR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.45-2.61, < 0.00001) was observed in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to the pre-COVID-19 period.
CONCLUSION
There is a significantly higher incidence of complicated appendicitis in children during the COVID-19 pandemic than in the pre-COVID-19 period. Additionally, a significantly higher proportion of children was managed via the NOM during the pandemic in comparison to the pre-pandemic period.
PubMed: 35054293
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12010127 -
Alternative Therapies in Health and... Nov 2023Acute appendicitis (AA) is a prevalent abdominal emergency in children, and there has been growing interest in the use of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis (AA) is a prevalent abdominal emergency in children, and there has been growing interest in the use of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment (ERAT) over the past two decades. A meta-analysis of published retrospective studies was conducted to investigate the clinical characteristics and therapeutic efficacy of ERAT for AA in children.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective studies were carried out, encompassing data from PUBMED, MEDLINE, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and VIP Database. The search was limited to studies published between January 1, 2012, and June 31, 2022, with the final search conducted on October 31, 2022. No restrictions were imposed regarding publication or study design filters. The registration number in PROSPERO was CRD42022377739.
RESULTS
Seven retrospective cohort studies with 423 patients were included. The majority of children who underwent ERAT were male (57.6%, 95% CI 52.8%-62.4%). The ERAT procedure had a high success rate (99.5%, 95% CI 98.2%-100.0%) and averaged around 49 minutes. ERAT's efficacy for treating acute appendicitis was high (99.0%, 95% CI 96.5%-100.0%), with a low recurrence rate (4.2%, 95% CI 2.2%-6.7%). Patients typically stayed in the hospital for about 4.3 days, and the rate of postoperative complications was around 3.9% (95% CI 2.0%-6.2%).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the heterogeneity among studies, ERAT appears to be an effective treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children. It has a high success rate, a low recurrence rate, preserves the appendix's function, and causes minimal damage. ERAT could be considered a safe and effective treatment option for pediatric appendicitis.
Topics: Humans; Male; Child; Female; Appendicitis; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Acute Disease; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37632960
DOI: No ID Found -
Trials Jun 2015Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Despite this, there is no core outcome set (COS) described for randomised controlled trials (RCTs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Despite this, there is no core outcome set (COS) described for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children with appendicitis and hence no consensus regarding outcome selection, definition and reporting. We aimed to identify outcomes currently reported in studies of paediatric appendicitis.
METHODS
Using a defined, sensitive search strategy, we identified RCTs and systematic reviews (SRs) of treatment interventions in children with appendicitis. Included studies were all in English and investigated the effect of one or more treatment interventions in children with acute appendicitis or undergoing appendicectomy for presumed acute appendicitis. Studies were reviewed and data extracted by two reviewers. Primary (if defined) and all other outcomes were recorded and assigned to the core areas 'Death', 'Pathophysiological Manifestations', 'Life Impact', 'Resource Use' and 'Adverse Events', using OMERACT Filter 2.0.
RESULTS
A total of 63 studies met the inclusion criteria reporting outcomes from 51 RCTs and nine SRs. Only 25 RCTs and four SRs defined a primary outcome. A total of 115 unique and different outcomes were identified. RCTs reported a median of nine outcomes each (range 1 to 14). The most frequently reported outcomes were wound infection (43 RCTs, nine SRs), intra-peritoneal abscess (41 RCTs, seven SRs) and length of stay (35 RCTs, six SRs) yet all three were reported in just 25 RCTs and five SRs. Common outcomes had multiple different definitions or were frequently not defined. Although outcomes were reported within all core areas, just one RCT and no SR reported outcomes for all core areas. Outcomes assigned to the 'Death' and 'Life Impact' core areas were reported least frequently (in six and 15 RCTs respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a wide heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes in paediatric appendicitis, and little overlap in outcomes used across studies. A paucity of studies report patient relevant outcomes within the 'Life Impact' core area. These factors preclude meaningful evidence synthesis, and pose challenges to designing prospective clinical trials and cohort studies. The development of a COS for paediatric appendicitis is warranted.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendicitis; Child; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26081254
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-015-0783-1 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... 2017Appendectomy has long been the mainstay of intervention for acute appendicitis, aiming at preventing perforation, peritonitis, abscess formation and recurrence. With... (Review)
Review
The current management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: should there be a change in paradigm? A systematic review of the literatures and analysis of treatment performance.
INTRODUCTION
Appendectomy has long been the mainstay of intervention for acute appendicitis, aiming at preventing perforation, peritonitis, abscess formation and recurrence. With better understanding of the disease process, non-operative management (NOM) with antibiotics alone has been proved a feasible treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. This article aimed at systematically reviewing the available literatures and discussing the question whether NOM should replace appendectomy as the standard first-line treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis.
METHOD
A search of the Embase, Pubmed and Cochrane Library was performed using the keywords 'acute appendicitis' and 'antibiotic therapy'. Meta-analysis with inverse variance model for continuous variable and Mantel Haenzel Model for dichotomous variable was performed to evaluate the one year treatment efficacy, morbidities rate, sick leave duration and length of hospital stay associated with emergency appendectomy and NOM.
RESULTS
Six randomized control trials were identified out of 1943 publications. NOM had a significant lower treatment efficacy rate at one year, 0.10 (95% CI 0.03-0.36, < 0.01), when compared to appendectomy. The morbidities rate was comparable between the two interventions. The length of hospital stay was longer, with a mean difference of 1.08 days (95% CI 0.09-2.07, = 0.03), and the sick leave duration was shorter, a mean difference of 3.37 days (95% CI -5.90 to -0.85 days, < 0.01) for NOM.
CONCLUSION
The paradigm remains unchanged, that appendectomy is the gold standard of treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, given its higher efficacy rate when compared to NOM.
Topics: Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Clinical Protocols; Disease Management; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29075315
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-017-0157-y -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) Feb 2023The Alvarado score (AS) has not been widely used for diagnosing acute appendicitis although it has shown to be a good predictor for diagnosing appendicitis. The aim was...
UNLABELLED
The Alvarado score (AS) has not been widely used for diagnosing acute appendicitis although it has shown to be a good predictor for diagnosing appendicitis. The aim was to perform a systematic review of the available literature and synthesize the evidence.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed as per the PRISMA guidelines using search engines like Ovid, PubMed, and Google Scholar with predefined, strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality assessment of included studies was performed using the QUADAS 2 tool. Summary statistics were performed for all variables. A linear regression model was performed between dependent and independent variables using STATA software. Heterogeneity testing showed significant heterogeneity within the included studies; hence, a forest plot with pooled estimates could not be constructed, and therefore a meta-regression was performed.
RESULTS
Seventeen full-text articles met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ten of which were identified as low-risk studies. Five studies were included in final data pooling with total patients being 2239 and mean age of 31.9 years. (1) Linear regression demonstrated an association between 'histological appendicitis' and 'AS 7-0' with patients receiving intervention, with a significant value of less than 0.005. (2) Meta-regression demonstrated a positive coefficient (0.298), a positive score of 2.20 with a significant value of 0.028 for patients with 'high AS' who received interventions that were significantly proven to be 'histologically appendicitis', indicating a cause-and-effect relationship.
CONCLUSION
High AS (7 and above) is a significant predictor of acute appendicitis. The authors recommend further prospective randomized clinical trials to establish a cause-and-effect relationship.
PubMed: 36845768
DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000000238 -
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2022Background: Despite great advances in medicine, numerous available laboratory markers, and radiological imaging, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) in some cases... (Review)
Review
Background: Despite great advances in medicine, numerous available laboratory markers, and radiological imaging, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) in some cases still remains controversial and challenging for clinicians. Because of that, clinicians are still looking for an ideal marker that would be specific to AA. The red blood cell distribution width (RDW) has been recently investigated in several studies as a potential biomarker for AA. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to systematically summarize and compare all relevant data on RDW as a diagnostic biomarker for AA. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Excerpta Medica database—EMBASE) were systematically searched for relevant comparative studies by two independent researches using keywords ((red cell distribution width) OR rdw) AND (appendicitis). An independent assessment of the methodological quality was performed by two authors using the Downs and Black scale. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform the meta-analysis. Results: Fifteen studies were included in the final meta-analysis; the majority of the studies was retrospective. Nine studies compared the RDW values between AA and non-AA; four studies compared the same between AA and healthy controls, while two studies compared the RDW values among all three groups. The estimated heterogeneity among the studies for all outcome was statistically significant (I2 = 92−99%, p < 0.00001). The pooling the data demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the RDW values (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.03, 95% CI = (−0.46, 0.52), p = 0.91) between AA and healthy controls as well as between AA and non-AA cases (WMD = 0.23, 95%CI = (−0.19, 0.65), p = 0.28). A separate subanalysis was performed to evaluate the utility of this biomarker for the pediatric age group. Pooling the data demonstrated no significant difference among the AA and non-AA groups in terms of the RDW values (WMD = 0.99, 95% CI = (−0.35, 2.33), p = 0.15). Conclusion: The RDW value difference demonstrated no statistically significant difference in AA versus healthy individuals and AA versus non-AA individuals. At the moment, there is no evidence of RDW utility in diagnostic testing of AA. Further research with prospective, multicenter studies and studies targeting special patient groups with a large sample size are needed in this field.
PubMed: 35454059
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12041011 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Mar 2023Intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline has been widely used in surgical practice. However, the effectiveness of IOPL with saline in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline has been widely used in surgical practice. However, the effectiveness of IOPL with saline in patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) remains controversial. This study aims to systematically review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of IOPL in patients with IAIs.
METHODS
The databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, CNKI, WanFang, and CBM databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2022. Random-effects models were used to calculate the risk ratio (RR), mean difference, and standardized mean difference. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to rate the quality of the evidence.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs with 1318 participants were included, of which eight studies on appendicitis and two studies on peritonitis. Moderate-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (0% vs. 1.1%; RR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.02-6.39]), intra-abdominal abscess (12.3% vs. 11.8%; RR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.70-1.48]; I = 24%), incisional surgical site infections (3.3% vs. 3.8%; RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.18-2.86]; I = 50%), postoperative complication (11.0% vs. 13.2%; RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.39-1.41]; I = 64%), reoperation (2.9% vs. 1.7%; RR,1.71 [95% CI, 0.74-3.93]; I = 0%) and readmission (5.2% vs. 6.6%; RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.48-1.87]; I = 7%) in patients with appendicitis when compared to non-IOPL. Low-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (22.7% vs. 23.3%; RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.45-2.09], I = 0%) and intra-abdominal abscess (5.1% vs. 5.0%; RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.16-6.98], I = 0%) in patients with peritonitis when compared to non-IOPL.
CONCLUSION
IOPL with saline use in patients with appendicitis was not associated with significantly decreased risk of mortality, intra-abdominal abscess, incisional surgical site infection, postoperative complication, reoperation, and readmission compared with non-IOPL. These findings do not support the routine use of IOPL with saline in patients with appendicitis. The benefits of IOPL for IAI caused by other types of abdominal infections need to be investigated.
Topics: Humans; Peritoneal Lavage; Abdominal Abscess; Peritonitis; Surgical Wound Infection; Appendicitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36991507
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00496-6