-
F1000Research 2023Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in pregnant women. There has been a wide variance in clinical practice worldwide, with some favoring an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in pregnant women. There has been a wide variance in clinical practice worldwide, with some favoring an antibiotic-only approach while others prefer surgery as the first-line management. Therefore, we designed the current analysis to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of antibiotics versus surgery management. We searched PubMed, Scopus, EuropePMC, and Cochrane Central from March 4, 1904 until November 25, 2022, to look for studies comparing antibiotics and surgery in pregnant patients with acute appendicitis. We only included studies that provided a comparison between the two treatments. We included preterm delivery, fetal loss, maternal death, and complications as outcomes. The results were compared using an odds ratio and 95% confidence interval. We also performed a sensitivity analysis by excluding studies with a serious risk of bias. We included five non-randomized studies for the analysis. We found that patients in the antibiotic group had a lower risk of preterm labor (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.92]; p 0.02) but a higher risk of complications (OR 1.79 [95% CI 1.19-2.69]; p 0.005). We did not find any difference in the other outcomes. The increased risk of complications should caution clinicians about using antibiotics as the first-line management. More studies are required to identify patients who would benefit the most before antibiotics could be adopted as a treatment for acute appendicitis in pregnant patients.
Topics: Humans; Appendicitis; Pregnancy; Female; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Pregnancy Complications; Appendectomy; Acute Disease
PubMed: 38919838
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.129906.2 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Jun 2024Appendicectomy remains the standard treatment for appendicitis. There is a lack of clarity on the timeframe in which surgery should be performed to avoid unfavourable... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Appendicectomy remains the standard treatment for appendicitis. There is a lack of clarity on the timeframe in which surgery should be performed to avoid unfavourable outcomes.
AIM
To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the impact the (1)time-of-day surgery is performed (2), time elapsed from symptom onset to hospital presentation (patient time) (3), time elapsed from hospital presentation to surgery (hospital time), and (4)time elapsed from symptom onset to surgery (total time) have on appendicectomy outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA-NMA guidelines. The time-of-day which surgery was done was divided into day, evening and night. The other groups were divided into < 24 h, 24-48 h and > 48 h. The rate of complicated appendicitis, operative time, perforation, post-operative complications, surgical site infection (SSI), length of stay (LOS), readmission and mortality rates were analysed.
RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included with a total of 232,678 patients. The time of day at which surgery was performed had no impact on outcomes. The incidence of complicated appendicitis, post-operative complications and LOS were significantly better when the hospital time and total time were < 24 h. Readmission and mortality rates were significantly better when the hospital time was < 48 h. SSI, operative time, and the rate of perforation were comparable in all groups.
CONCLUSION
Appendicectomy within 24 h of hospital admission is associated with improved outcomes compared to patients having surgery 24-48 and > 48 h after admission. The time-of-day which surgery is performed does not impact outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Length of Stay; Network Meta-Analysis; Time Factors; Postoperative Complications; Time-to-Treatment; Treatment Outcome; Operative Time
PubMed: 38877592
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-024-00549-4 -
Cureus May 2024Appendicitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal conditions a person can develop. Throughout the years of assessing the different focuses of appendicitis, such as... (Review)
Review
Appendicitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal conditions a person can develop. Throughout the years of assessing the different focuses of appendicitis, such as origin, symptoms, labs, diagnosis, treatment, and complications, there have been mere mentions of sex differences. One of the most known sex differences in appendicitis is the fact that males are significantly more likely to develop appendicitis compared to females. Another postulated difference is that males may be more likely to develop a perforated appendix. These differences significantly affect the various aspects of diagnosing and treating appendicitis and may even influence the outcome of appendicitis. Sex difference analysis of conditions has been widely researched over the last two decades, and sex can influence and impact conditions from initial presentation to the outcome of treatment. This paper evaluates the sex differences in appendicitis concerning incidence, risk factors, symptoms, diagnosis technique, treatment, and outcomes across ages. Following PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review reviewed PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest databases for articles pertaining to sex differences in appendicitis. The original article count was 21,121, which was narrowed down to 28 publications. It was found that, as previously described, males had a significantly higher rate of appendicitis, as well as were at significant risk of perforated appendicitis. No official risk factors were found to differ between the sexes, but males were more likely to complain of symptoms like right lower quadrant cramps/tenderness/pain and loss of appetite. Scores such as the pediatric appendicitis score (PAS) and Ohmann have been used to diagnose appendicitis, but the PAS was significantly more accurate for females, and the Ohmann resulted in significantly fewer negative appendectomies in females as well. Ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) are still the gold standards for diagnosis; however, while time to CT was significantly delayed in females, they were more likely to undergo extensive imaging, possibly to rule out other conditions. Males were more likely to undergo open appendectomies compared to females, who more frequently underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, yet females were more likely to experience complications. Further research should evaluate the influences that can predict postoperative outcomes following appendectomies between sexes and how to prevent/reduce their occurrence.
PubMed: 38854248
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60055 -
Cirugia Y Cirujanos 2024Acute appendicitis remains as a differential diagnosis in older patients with abdominal pain. The Alvarado scale may assist to guide the diagnosis and treatment of this...
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis remains as a differential diagnosis in older patients with abdominal pain. The Alvarado scale may assist to guide the diagnosis and treatment of this entity. The operative characteristics of the scale are little known in this population.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review of original studies published between 1986 and 2022 evaluating the diagnostic performance of the Alvarado scale in older adults with suspected acute appendicitis. The review was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. The evaluation of the methodological quality of the studies was performed according to the ROBINS-I criteria.
RESULTS
Four original studies of retrospective design including 480 patients were identified. The heterogeneity and poor methodological quality limited an aggregate statistical analysis (meta-analysis). The value of the ROC curve of the scale varies between 0.799 and 0.969. From the available studies, the value of the ROC curve is lower in comparison to the RIPASA scale and comparable to the Lintula scale.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence on the diagnostic performance of the Alvarado scale in older adults is limited. The poor methodological quality of the available studies calls for a prudent use of this tool in this population. Our findings offer opportunities for future research.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Humans; Abdominal Pain; Acute Disease; Appendicitis; Diagnosis, Differential; Retrospective Studies; ROC Curve
PubMed: 38782393
DOI: 10.24875/CIRU.23000155 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2024When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this...
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.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Pregnancy Complications; Laparoscopy; Appendicitis; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Appendectomy; Biliary Tract Diseases
PubMed: 38700549
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10810-1 -
Cureus Jan 2024Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an imaging modality that has become a fundamental part of clinical care provided in the emergency department (ED). The applications... (Review)
Review
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an imaging modality that has become a fundamental part of clinical care provided in the emergency department (ED). The applications of this tool in the ED have ranged from resuscitation, diagnosis, and therapeutic to procedure guidance. This review aims to summarize the evidence on the use of POCUS for diagnosis and procedure guidance. To achieve this, CrossRef, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were extensively searched for studies published between January 2000 and November 2023. Additionally, the risk of bias assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (for studies on the diagnostic role of POCUS) and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (for studies on the use of POCUS for procedure guidance). Furthermore, diagnostic accuracy outcomes were pooled using STATA 16 software (StatCorp., College Station, TX, USA), while outcomes related to procedure guidance were pooled using the Review Manager software. The study included 81 articles (74 evaluating the diagnostic application of POCUS and seven evaluating the use of POCUS in guiding clinical procedures). In our findings sensitivities and specificities for various conditions were as follows: appendicitis, 65% and 89%; hydronephrosis, 82% and 74%; small bowel obstruction, 93% and 82%; cholecystitis, 75% and 96%; retinal detachment, 94% and 91%; abscess, 95% and 85%; foreign bodies, 67% and 97%; clavicle fractures, 93% and 94%; distal forearm fractures, 97% and 94%; metacarpal fractures, 94% and 92%; skull fractures, 91% and 97%; and pleural effusion, 91% and 97%. A subgroup analysis of data from 11 studies also showed that the two-point POCUS has a sensitivity and specificity of 89% and 96%, while the three-point POCUS is 87% sensitive and 92% specific in the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis. In addition, the analyses showed that ultrasound guidance significantly increases the overall success rate of peripheral venous access (p = 0.02) and significantly reduces the number of skin punctures (p = 0.01) compared to conventional methods. In conclusion, POCUS can be used in the ED to diagnose a wide range of clinical conditions accurately. Furthermore, it can be used to guide peripheral venous access and central venous catheter insertion.
PubMed: 38694948
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.52371 -
In Vivo (Athens, Greece) 2024Primary omental torsion is uncommon, mimicking appendicitis and other acute abdominal pathologies. It often escapes diagnosis on imaging investigation or conventional...
BACKGROUND/AIM
Primary omental torsion is uncommon, mimicking appendicitis and other acute abdominal pathologies. It often escapes diagnosis on imaging investigation or conventional open laparotomy. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of laparoscopy on the various parameters of this entity, including incidence, diagnosis, and treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was performed, including PubMed and Scopus databases, without a time limit, following the PRISMA principles. A total of 16 articles from January 2000 to December 2023, corresponding to 56 children with primary omental torsion, complied with the research criteria.
RESULTS
Primary omental torsion was associated with obesity. Symptoms were right abdomen oriented, often compared to those of acute appendicitis. Preoperative ultrasound displayed low diagnostic accuracy, whereas computerized tomography diagnosed only two thirds of cases. In all patients, the vermiform appendix was normal.
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopy affected both diagnosis and treatment of primary omental torsion in children. Easy peritoneal cavity access rendered possible the diagnosis of cases previously discharged as abdominal pain of unknown etiology. Combined with the increased pediatric obesity, it also affected primary omental torsion incidence. The recent pathogenetic theories may be better supported today, as laparoscopy provides a detailed view in situ, and facilitates harvesting of fat tissue from the omentum for molecular investigation. The diagnostic efficiency of laparoscopy is superior to ultrasonography and computerized tomography. Finally, the removal of the ischemic omentum is technically easier compared to the open laparotomy alternative with all the technical difficulties of traction of a vulnerable hemorrhagic tissue through a small incision.
Topics: Child; Female; Humans; Appendicitis; Laparoscopy; Omentum; Peritoneal Diseases; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Torsion Abnormality; Ultrasonography; Male
PubMed: 38688642
DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13536 -
Cureus Jan 2024Recent studies have discussed the role of antibiotic treatment in the conservative management of acute appendicitis and whether antibiotics are a safe option to replace... (Review)
Review
Recent studies have discussed the role of antibiotic treatment in the conservative management of acute appendicitis and whether antibiotics are a safe option to replace appendicectomy, which has been the gold standard treatment of acute appendicitis for many years. The bibliographic databases Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and PubMed comparing conservative versus surgical treatment of acute appendicitis were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Twenty-one studies consisting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses involving 44,699 participants were identified. At least 17,865 participants were treated with antibiotics. Our studies compare antibiotic versus appendicectomy among acute appendicitis patients ranging from 7 to 94 years of age. In most studies, patients received parenteral antibiotics for a total of one to three days, and oral antibiotics such as oral cephalosporin plus metronidazole, oral amoxicillin/clavulanate, oral fluoroquinolones plus Tinidazole upon hospital discharge for a total of 7 to 10 days. The total course of antibiotics for both parenteral and oral regimes ranged from 2 to 16 days, with 10 days being the commonest duration. The recurrence rate following initial antibiotic treatment at one-year follow-up ranged from 13% to 38%, while the mean duration of recurrence ranged from three to eight months. The majority of the patients with recurrence underwent appendicectomy, while some patients were either given a repeat or different course of antibiotics due to the possible presence of antibiotic resistance; however, only 2.4% of the patients were successfully treated upon completion of the second course of antibiotics. Most of the studies concluded that appendicectomy remains the gold standard treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis, given its higher efficacy and lower complication rates. Although antibiotic treatment cannot be routinely recommended, it can be considered an appropriate alternative in selected patients with uncomplicated appendicitis who wish to avoid surgery and also acknowledge the risk of recurrence and the potential need for subsequent surgery at the same time.
PubMed: 38384640
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.52697 -
Clinical and Experimental Vaccine... Jan 2024Conduct a systematic review of case reports and case series regarding the development of acute abdomen following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, to...
PURPOSE
Conduct a systematic review of case reports and case series regarding the development of acute abdomen following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, to describe the possible association and the clinical and demographic characteristics in detail.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study included case report studies and case series that focused on the development of acute abdomen following COVID-19 vaccination. Systematic review studies, literature, letters to the editor, brief comments, and so forth were excluded. PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched until June 15, 2023. The Joanna Briggs Institute tool was used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the study. Descriptive data were presented as frequency, median, mean, and standard deviation.
RESULTS
Seventeen clinical case studies were identified, evaluating 17 patients with acute abdomen associated with COVID-19 vaccination, which included acute appendicitis (n=3), acute pancreatitis (n=9), diverticulitis (n=1), cholecystitis (n=2), and colitis (n=2). The COVID-19 vaccine most commonly linked to acute abdomen was Pfizer-BioNTech (messenger RNA), accounting for 64.71% of cases. Acute abdomen predominantly occurred after the first vaccine dose (52.94%). All patients responded objectively to medical (88.34%) and surgical (11.76%) treatment and were discharged within a few weeks. No cases of death were reported.
CONCLUSION
Acute abdomen is a rare complication of great interest in the medical and surgical practice of COVID-19 vaccination. Our study is based on a small sample of patients; therefore, it is recommended to conduct future observational studies to fully elucidate the underlying mechanisms of this association.
PubMed: 38362368
DOI: 10.7774/cevr.2024.13.1.42 -
Cureus Jan 2024The opioid epidemic has become a critical public health issue, driven by the widespread distribution and misuse of prescription opioids. This paper investigates... (Review)
Review
The opioid epidemic has become a critical public health issue, driven by the widespread distribution and misuse of prescription opioids. This paper investigates analgesic management in the context of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) as an alternative to open appendectomy, aiming to reduce the reliance on opioids for postoperative pain control. A comprehensive literature review was conducted from January 1, 2003, to November 1, 2023, utilizing PubMed, ProQuest, and ScienceDirect databases. The search focused on peer-reviewed experimental and observational studies involving adults (18 years and older) undergoing LA. The original search resulted in 18,258 publications, which were then screened using PRISMA guidelines. Among the filtered 18 studies included for analysis and review, the transition from open to LA demonstrated a consistent decrease in postoperative pain, leading to a reduced need for opioid prescriptions. Analgesic strategies included the use of local anesthetics (lidocaine, bupivacaine, ropivacaine), spinal/epidural anesthesia, nerve blocks, and a multimodal approach with NSAIDs and acetaminophen. Studies demonstrated the efficacy of local anesthetics in reducing postoperative pain, prompting a shift toward non-opioid analgesics. The use of spinal/epidural anesthesia and nerve blocks further supported the trend of minimizing opioid prescriptions. While some variations in anesthetic approaches existed, overall, patients undergoing LA required fewer opioid doses, reflecting a positive shift in postoperative pain management. Patients undergoing LA experienced lower rates of readmission, reduced post-operative pain, better cosmetic outcomes, and shorter recovery times, contributing to a diminished demand for opioid medications. This review underscores the potential for non-opioid analgesic strategies in surgical contexts, aligning with the broader imperative to address the opioid epidemic and promote safer and more sustainable pain management practices.
PubMed: 38344561
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.52037