-
Pediatric Surgery International Nov 2023The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way to manage the emergencies, as people faced fear of the hospitals, with possible delay in the diagnosis. Moreover, clinicians... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way to manage the emergencies, as people faced fear of the hospitals, with possible delay in the diagnosis. Moreover, clinicians had to rearrange protocols for diagnosis and treatment. We aimed to assess whether COVID-19 pandemic influenced severity of inflammation, management, and outcomes of acute appendicitis (AA), when compared to the pre-COVID era. Using defined search strategy, two independent investigators identified those studies comparing pediatric AA during COVID-19 pandemic versus the pre-COVID-19 period. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. Data are mean ± SD. Of 528 abstracts, 36 comparative studies were included (32,704pts). Time from symptoms onset to surgery was longer during the pandemics compared to the pre-COVID-19 (1.6 ± 0.9 versus 1.4 ± 0.9 days; p < 0.00001). Minimally Invasive Surgery was similar during COVID-19 (70.4 ± 30.2%) versus control period (69.6 ± 25.3%; p = ns). Complicated appendicitis was increased during the pandemics (35.9 ± 14.8%) compared to control period (33.4 ± 17.2%; p < 0.0001). Post-operative complications were comparable between these two groups (7.7 ± 6.5% versus 9.1 ± 5.3%; p = ns). It seems that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the time of diagnosis, severity of inflammation, and type of surgery. However, the number of post-operative complications was not different between the two groups, leading to the conclusion that the patients were correctly managed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3 Meta-analysis on Level 3 studies.
Topics: Humans; Child; Appendicitis; Pandemics; COVID-19; Inflammation; Acute Disease; Postoperative Complications; Appendectomy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 38017246
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-023-05594-9 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Nov 2023Studies evaluating the rate and histology of appendiceal neoplasms between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis include a small number of patients. Therefore, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Studies evaluating the rate and histology of appendiceal neoplasms between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis include a small number of patients. Therefore, we sought a meta-analysis and systematic review comparing the rates and types of appendiceal neoplasm between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis.
METHODS
We included articles published from the time of inception of the datasets to September 30, 2022. The electronic databases included English publications in Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus.
RESULTS
A total of 4962 patients with appendicitis enrolled in 4 comparative studies were included. The mean age was 43.55 years (16- 94), and half were male (51%). Based on intra-operative findings, 1394 (38%) had complicated appendicitis, and 3558 (62%) had uncomplicated appendicitis. The overall incidence rate of neoplasm was 1.98%. No significant difference was found in the incidence rate of appendiceal neoplasm between complicated (3.29%) and uncomplicated (1.49%) appendicitis (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.16- 1.23; p < 0.087; I2 = 54.9%). The most common appendiceal neoplasms were Neuroendocrine Tumors (NET) (49.21%), Nonmucinous Adenocarcinoma (24.24%), Mixed Adeno-Neuroendocrine Tumor (MANEC) (11.40%), Mucinous Adenocarcinoma (4.44%). There was a significant difference between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis in rates of adenocarcinoma (50% vs. 13%), NET (31% vs. 74%), MANEC (19% vs. 13%) (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
While there was no significant difference in the overall neoplasm rate between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis, the NET rate was significantly higher in uncomplicated appendicitis. In comparison, the Adenocarcinoma rate was considerably higher in Complicated appendicitis. These findings emphasize the importance of evaluating risk factors for neoplasm when considering appendectomy in patients with appendicitis.
Topics: Humans; Male; Adult; Female; Appendiceal Neoplasms; Appendicitis; Incidence; Risk Factors; Appendectomy; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Adenocarcinoma; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37940770
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03164-0 -
Clinics and Research in Hepatology and... Dec 2023To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment (ERAT) for acute appendicitis (AA) by conducting a meta-analysis of clinical randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment (ERAT) for acute appendicitis (AA) by conducting a meta-analysis of clinical randomized trials (RCTs).
METHODS
Eight electronic databases were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RevMan5.3 and STATA14 software were used to for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
Twenty-six RCTs with 2236 subjects were analyzed. First, operative time, length of hospital stay and duration of bed rest were shorter in the ERAT groups than in the control groups, with the pooled MD and 95 % CI being -13.22(-20.09, -6.35)(p = 0.0002), -2.13 (-2.47, -1.80)(p < 0.00001) and -3.15 (-3.76, -2.53)(p < 0.00001), respectively. Second, patients in the ERAT groups had a lower incidence of complications than the control groups, with a pooled RR and 95 % CI of 0.25(0.18, 0.35)(p < 0.00001). Third, patients who received ERAT returned to normal temperature faster than the control groups, the pooled MD and 95 % CI was -3.39(-4.36, -2.42)(p<0.00001). Finally, the result showed that the recurrence rate in the ERAT groups was approximately twice that of control groups, with the pooled RR and 95 % CI being 2.10(1.02, 4.32)(p < 0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS
ERAT results in fewer complications and shorter recovery time. And compared to appendectomy, ERAT reduces operative time and intraoperative bleeding. However, the recurrence of acute appendicitis after ERAT remains a concern. And more multicenter and large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm the benefits of ERAT.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
We have registered on the PROSPERO [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], and the registration number is CRD42023420171.
Topics: Humans; Appendicitis; Treatment Outcome; Endoscopy; Appendectomy; Acute Disease; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37925019
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinre.2023.102241 -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) Oct 2023Appendiceal stump closure (ASC) is a key step in performing laparoscopic appendicectomy. Currently, there is no gold standard method to achieve this goal. The ideal... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Appendiceal stump closure (ASC) is a key step in performing laparoscopic appendicectomy. Currently, there is no gold standard method to achieve this goal. The ideal method should be safe, easily available, and have a short learning curve. Out of all those appendiceal stump closure methods, the use of hem-o-Lok demonstrates its feasibility in replacing the traditionally used endoloop. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors aim to review the currently available evidence addressing the topic of interest.
METHOD
The PubMed and Embase databases were searched with the paired search terms appendicitis, clip, and endoloop by two authors separately. The quality of the randomized controlled trials was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the observational studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis was conducted with Cochrane Review Manager version 5.4.
RESULT
Eighteen studies were included for quantitative analysis. The appendiceal stump closure time was shortened by 2 min 7 s using a hem-o-lok with 95% CI 1 min 48 s-2 min 26 s, less than 0.00001. The pooled results of 6 randomized controlled trials demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in operative time of 5.15 min from adopting the hem-o-lok approach (=0.001, 95% CI -2.05 to -8.24 min). Both endoloop and hem-o-lok demonstrated a comparable postoperative hospital stay and infective complication profile.
CONCLUSION
The application of Hem-o-Lok demonstrates a comparable to endoloop ligation in terms of operative time and a potential benefit on the complication. When considering financial and technical aspects, it serves as an alternative to endoloop.
PubMed: 37811063
DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001260 -
Endoscopy International Open Sep 2023Endoscopic resection of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice is technically challenging and is commonly referred for surgical resection. However, post-resection...
Endoscopic resection of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice is technically challenging and is commonly referred for surgical resection. However, post-resection appendicitis is a concern. Many studies have varying rates of post-procedure appendicitis. We aim to report the rate of post-resection appendicitis by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies that involved the use of a full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for management of appendiceal polyps were included. The primary outcome was appendicitis after FTRD and a subgroup analysis was performed on studies that only included FTRD performed at the appendiceal orifice. Appendicitis was encountered in 15% (95%CI: [11-21]) of the patients with 61% (95% CI: [44-76]) requiring surgical management. Pooled rates of technical success, histologic FTR, and histologic R0 resection in this sub-group (n=123) were 92% (95% CI: [85-96]), 98% (95% CI: [93-100]), and 72% (95% CI: [64-84%]), respectively. Post-resection histopathological evaluation revealed a mean resected specimen size of 16.8 ± 5.4 mm, with non-neoplastic pathology in 9 (7%), adenomas in 103 (84%), adenomas + high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in nine (7%), and adenocarcinoma in two (2%). The pooled rate for non-appendicitis-related surgical management (technical failure and/or high-risk lesions) was 11 % (CI: 7-17). FTRD appears to be an effective method for managing appendiceal lesions. However, appendicitis post-resection occurs in a non-trivial number of patients and the R0 resection rate in appendiceal lesions is only 72%. Therefore, caution should be employed in the use of this technique, considering the relative risks of surgical intervention in each patient.
PubMed: 37810898
DOI: 10.1055/a-2131-4891 -
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 -
World Journal of Surgery Dec 2023Appendicitis is one of the most common emergency surgical conditions worldwide. Delays in accessing appendectomy can lead to complications. Evidence on these delays in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Appendicitis is one of the most common emergency surgical conditions worldwide. Delays in accessing appendectomy can lead to complications. Evidence on these delays in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is lacking. The aim of this review was to identify and synthesise the available evidence on delays to accessing appendectomy in LMICs.
METHODS
This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews framework. The delays and their interconnectivity in LMICs were synthesised and interpreted using the Three Delays framework. We reviewed Africa Wide EBSCOhost, PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, African Journals Online (AJOL), and Bioline databases.
RESULTS
Our search identified 21 893 studies, of which 78 were included in the final analysis. All of the studies were quantitative. Fifty per cent of the studies included all three types of delays. Delays in seeking care were influenced by a lack of awareness of appendicitis symptoms, and the use of self and alternative medication, which could be linked to delays in receiving care, and the barrier refusal of medical treatment due to fear. Financial concerns were a barrier observed throughout the care pathway.
CONCLUSION
This review highlighted the need for additional studies on delays to accessing appendectomy in additional LMICs. Our review demonstrates that in LMICs, persons seeking appendectomy present late to health-care facilities due to several patient-related factors. After reaching a health-care facility, accessing appendectomy can further be delayed owing to a lack of adequate hospital resources.
Topics: Humans; Developing Countries; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Health Facilities; Hospitals
PubMed: 37747549
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-023-07183-2 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Aug 2023Acute appendicitis is a frequently encountered surgical emergency. Despite several scoring systems, the possibility of delayed diagnosis persists. In addition, a delayed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis is a frequently encountered surgical emergency. Despite several scoring systems, the possibility of delayed diagnosis persists. In addition, a delayed diagnosis leads to an increased risk of complicated appendicitis. Hence, there is a need to identify biological markers to help clinicians rapidly and accurately diagnose and prognosticate acute appendicitis with a high sensitivity and specificity. Although several markers have been evaluated, the pressing concern is still the low specificity of these markers. One such marker is serum ischemia-modified albumin (IMA), which can be a novel biomarker for accurately diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis.
METHODS
The authors conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases through February 2023 as per the PRISMA guidelines. The difference in the levels of IMA between patients with acute appendicitis vs. healthy controls, and the difference in the levels of IMA between patients with complicated vs. non-complicated acute appendicitis were taken as the outcome measures. Statistical analysis was performed using a random effects model and mean difference (MD) was calculated. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
RESULTS
A total of six prospective comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis revealed that the mean level of serum IMA was significantly raised in the acute appendicitis group (MD 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.37, = 0.01). Similarly, the mean serum IMA levels were also raised in the complicated appendicitis group compared to the non-complicated appendicitis group (MD 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.10, = 0.02). Three of the studies included were, however, of poor methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Serum IMA is a viable potential marker for diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis. However, due to the limited methodological quality of available studies, further prospectively designed and adequately powered studies are needed.
PubMed: 37685553
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12175486 -
Health Science Reports Sep 2023Although appendicitis is rare in young infants, the reported mortality is high. Primary aim of this systematic review was to provide updated insights in the mortality...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Although appendicitis is rare in young infants, the reported mortality is high. Primary aim of this systematic review was to provide updated insights in the mortality and morbidity (postoperative complications, Clavien-Dindo grades I-IV) of appendicitis in infants ≤3 months of age. Secondary aims comprised the evaluation of patient characteristics, diagnostic work-up, treatment strategies, comorbidity, and factors associated with poor outcome.
METHODS
This systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA statement with a search performed in Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science (up to September 5th 2022). Original articles (published in English ≥1980) reporting on infants ≤3 months of age with appendicitis were included. Both patients with abdominal appendicitis and herniated appendicitis (such as Amyand's hernia) were considered. Data were provided descriptively.
RESULTS
In total, 131 articles were included encompassing 242 cases after identification of 4294 records. Overall, 184 (76%) of the 242 patients had abdominal and 58 (24%) had herniated appendicitis. Two-hundred (83%) of the patients were newborns (≤28 days) and 42 (17%) were infants between 29 days and ≤3 months of age. Either immediate, or after initial conservative treatment, 236 (98%) patients underwent surgical treatment. Some 168 (69%) patients had perforated appendicitis. Mortality was reported in 20 (8%) patients and morbidity in an additional 18 (8%). All fatal cases had abdominal appendicitis and fatal outcome was relatively more often reported in newborns, term patients, patients with relevant comorbidity, nonperforated appendicitis and those presented from home.
CONCLUSION
Mortality was reported in 20 (8%) infants ≤3 months of age and additional morbidity in 18 (8%). All patients with fatal outcome had abdominal appendicitis. Several patient characteristics were relatively more often reported in infants with poor outcome and adequate monitoring, early recognition and prompt treatment may favour the outcome.
PubMed: 37680208
DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.1435 -
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