-
Deutsches Arzteblatt International Aug 2023Neoplasms of the vermiform appendix are rare. They comprise a heterogeneous group of entities requiring differentkinds of treatment. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Neoplasms of the vermiform appendix are rare. They comprise a heterogeneous group of entities requiring differentkinds of treatment.
METHODS
This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective literature search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochranedatabases.
RESULTS
0.5% of all tumors of the gastrointestinal tract arise in the appendix. Their treatment depends on their histopathologicalclassification and tumor stage. The mucosal epithelium gives rise to adenomas, sessile serrated lesions, adenocarcinomas,goblet-cell adenocarcinomas, and mucinous neoplasms. Neuroendocrine neoplasms originate in neuroectodermal tissue. Adenomasof the appendix can usually be definitively treated by appendectomy. Mucinous neoplasms, depending on their tumorstage, may require additional cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (HIPEC). Adeno -carcinomas and goblet-cell adenocarcinomas can metastasize via the lymphatic vessels and the bloodstream and should thereforebe treated by oncological right hemicolectomy. Approximately 80% of neuroendocrine tumors are less than 1 cm in diameterwhen diagnosed and can therefore be adequately treated by appendectomy; right hemicolectomy is recommended if the patienthas risk factors for metastasis via the lymphatic vessels. Systemic chemotherapy has not been shown to be beneficial forappendiceal neoplasms in prospective, randomized trials; it is recommended for adenocarcinomas and goblet-cell adenocarcinomasof stage III or higher, in analogy to the treatment of colorectal carcinoma.
Topics: Humans; Appendix; Appendiceal Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Hyperthermia, Induced; Adenocarcinoma; Appendectomy
PubMed: 37282595
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.m2023.0136 -
Nature Reviews. Gastroenterology &... Sep 2023The appendix is thought to have a role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis, but the nature and basis of this association remains unclear. In this Perspective, we... (Review)
Review
The appendix is thought to have a role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis, but the nature and basis of this association remains unclear. In this Perspective, we consider the biology of the appendix with respect to its immunological function and the microbiome, and how this relates to evidence that supports the involvement of the appendix in ulcerative colitis. In experimental models, removal of the inflamed appendix prevents colitis, and in human observational studies, appendectomy is associated with protection against ulcerative colitis. Further, among people who develop ulcerative colitis, appendectomy before diagnosis might influence the course and outcomes of the disease - some evidence suggests that it protects against colectomy but could increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Appendectomy after onset of ulcerative colitis seems to have disparate consequences. Clinical trials to understand whether appendectomy has a role in the treatment of ulcerative colitis are ongoing. Major questions about the role of the appendix in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis remain unanswered, and further research is needed to establish whether the connection is clinically relevant.
Topics: Humans; Colitis, Ulcerative; Appendix; Appendectomy; Colitis
PubMed: 37081213
DOI: 10.1038/s41575-023-00774-3 -
Surgery Dec 2023Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy has been proposed as an alternative strategy for treating appendicitis, but debate exists on its role compared with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy versus appendectomy or antibiotics in the modern approach to uncomplicated acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy has been proposed as an alternative strategy for treating appendicitis, but debate exists on its role compared with conventional treatment.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. The last search was in April of 2023. The risk ratio with a 95% confidence interval was calculated for dichotomous variables, and the mean difference with a 95% confidence interval for continuous variables. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool (randomized controlled trials) and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Intervention tool (non-randomized controlled trials).
RESULTS
Six studies met the eligibility criteria. Four studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 236 patients) and appendectomy (n = 339) and found no differences in technical success during index admission (risk ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.92,1.02]). Appendectomy showed superior outcomes for recurrence at 1-year follow-up (risk ratio 11.28, 95% confidence interval [2.61,48.73]). Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy required shorter procedural time (mean difference -14.38, 95% confidence interval [-20.17, -8.59]) and length of hospital stay (mean difference -1.19, 95% confidence interval [-2.37, -0.01]), with lower post-intervention abdominal pain (risk ratio 0.21, 95% confidence interval [0.14,0.32]). Two studies compared endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (n = 269) and antibiotic treatment (n = 280). Technical success during admission (risk ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval [0.91,1.35]) and appendicitis recurrence (risk ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval [0.08,14.87]) did not differ, but endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy decreased the length of hospitalization (mean difference -1.91, 95% confidence interval [-3.18, -0.64]).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis did not identify significant differences between endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy and appendectomy or antibiotics regarding technical success during index admission and treatment efficacy at 1-year follow-up. However, a high risk of imprecision limits these results. The advantages of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy in terms of reduced procedural times and shorter lengths of stay must be balanced against the increased risk of having an appendicitis recurrence at one year.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Hospitalization; Length of Stay; Abdominal Pain; Acute Disease
PubMed: 37806859
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.08.029 -
Deutsches Arzteblatt International Jan 2024
Topics: Child; Humans; Adolescent; Appendectomy; Postoperative Complications; Appendicitis
PubMed: 38427940
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.m2023.0268 -
Cureus Sep 2023Prior to the development of laparoscopic procedures, open appendectomy was the standard of care for the majority of appendicitis cases. Recently, studies have debated... (Review)
Review
Prior to the development of laparoscopic procedures, open appendectomy was the standard of care for the majority of appendicitis cases. Recently, studies have debated using antibiotics as a first-line treatment in uncomplicated appendicitis cases. The definition of uncomplicated appendicitis is not always clear-cut; however, with the large-scale accessibility of radiologic techniques, it is becoming increasingly easier to classify patient groups. As suggested by clinical and radiological patient data, this has raised the speculation of considering antibiotic therapy as the sole treatment modality in uncomplicated appendicitis cases. We aim to compare the options of surgery and antibiotics only in terms of efficacy, complications, and financial cost. A range of databases and search strategies were adopted, and various databases were used, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and JAMA. Collectively, 30 studies were reviewed, but only 18 were included. Efficacy rates were higher in the appendectomy group. Nevertheless, the antibiotics-only group maintained an efficacy rate greater than 70% at one-year follow-up. Risk factors that decreased the efficacy in medical management included the presence of appendicolith, neoplasm, appendiceal dilatation, peri-appendiceal fluid collection, higher mean temperature, CRP, and bilirubin. Complications were more frequent and significant in the surgery group. These included complications related to anaesthesia, surgical site infections, damage to nearby structures, and pulmonary embolism. Despite several years of follow-up and disease recurrences, higher financial costs were observed in surgically treated patients compared to the antibiotics-only group. Given the high success rates post-appendectomy for acute appendicitis over the decades, the efficacy of conservatively treated acute appendicitis raises a strong argument when choosing one of the two options. The efficacy remained consistently higher across the literature in the surgery group than in the antibiotics-only group. However, it is still arguable that antibiotics may be a preferable option given an efficacy rate of more than 70% at one year and overall higher complications associated with surgery. The argument of missing a neoplasm by avoiding surgery is valid. However, most are carcinoid neuroendocrine neoplasms with a low probability of metastasis (<5%) and are usually considered benign. Given the current practice focused on conservative and minimally invasive treatments and recently the COVID-19 pandemic, with its restrictions and lessons learnt, antibiotics may be the future standard for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Lastly, we noticed higher efficacy rates in articles published recently than those published at least five to ten years earlier. Antibiotics-only therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis is cost-effective with fewer complications than surgery. However, appendectomies have higher efficacy. Thus, surgical treatment prevails as the standard of care. Future literature should yield larger sample sizes and explore the numbers of emergency appendectomies mandated following antibiotics-only therapy.
PubMed: 37790034
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44506 -
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