-
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 -
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 -
Journal of the West African College of... 2017The known complications of appendicitis include perforated appendicitis with generalised peritonitis, appendiceal mass, appendiceal abscess, sepsis, adhesion formation... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The known complications of appendicitis include perforated appendicitis with generalised peritonitis, appendiceal mass, appendiceal abscess, sepsis, adhesion formation and in a few occasions, small bowel intestinal obstruction.
AIM
To review published cases of intestinal obstruction due to appendicitis with a view to better understand the pathophysiology of this complication.
METHODOLOGY
A search of the literature in the MEDLINE database, using PubMed and OvidSP, Scopus, Google Scholar and Cochrane Databases with the following MeSH terms: was done. Also, these searches were restricted according to the following MeSH limits: (a) January 1, 1950 to July 31, 2016, (b) English articles (c) Human.
RESULTS
Overall, 27 articles reported 45 patients with intestinal obstruction due to appendicitis. Of the 30 (66.7%) patients that the gender was indicated, 22 (48.9%) were male while 8 (17.8%) were female. In 38 (84.4%) cases the cause was mechanical obstruction resulting from one or a combination of the following: (a) appendix laid across loops of bowel bound down by adhesions, (b) herniation through a ring or gap formed by the appendix tip being attached to its base, (c) appendix tip attached to the bowel causing a torsion, (d) kinking of the bowel, (e) complex knotting. Pre-operative diagnosis was a major challenge and so, none was approached through incision based on the McBurney's point.The outcome of treatment which was mostly achieved by immediate appendectomy followed by adhesiolysis was sufficient and often gave good results.
CONCLUSION
This study has shown that appendicitis is an important cause of intestinal obstruction. Even though pre-operative diagnosis is still a major challenge, clinical evaluation and a high index of suspicion are key to diagnosis.
PubMed: 30525005
DOI: No ID Found -
The British Journal of Surgery Nov 2012Laparoscopic appendicectomy has gained wide acceptance as an alternative to open appendicectomy during pregnancy. However, data regarding the safety and optimal surgical... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic appendicectomy has gained wide acceptance as an alternative to open appendicectomy during pregnancy. However, data regarding the safety and optimal surgical approach to appendicitis in pregnancy are still controversial.
METHODS
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and open appendicectomy in pregnancy identified using PubMed and Scopus search engines from January 1990 to July 2011. Two reviewers independently extracted data on fetal loss, preterm delivery, wound infection, duration of operation, hospital stay, Apgar score and birth weight between laparoscopic and open appendicectomy groups.
RESULTS
Eleven studies with a total of 3415 women (599 in laparoscopic and 2816 in open group) were included in the analysis. Fetal loss was statistically significantly worse in those who underwent laparoscopy compared with open appendicectomy; the pooled relative risk (RR) was 1·91 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·31 to 2·77) without heterogeneity. The pooled RR for preterm labour was 1·44 (0·68 to 3·06), but this risk was not statistically significant. The mean difference in length of hospital stay was - 0·49 (-1·76 to - 0·78) days, but this was not clinically significant. No significant difference was found for wound infection, birth weight, duration of operation or Apgar score.
CONCLUSION
The available low-grade evidence suggests that laparoscopic appendicectomy in pregnant women might be associated with a greater risk of fetal loss.
Topics: Adult; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Female; Fetal Death; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Obstetric Labor, Premature; Operative Time; Patient Safety; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome
PubMed: 23001791
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8889 -
PloS One 2022In the last decades, several clinical scores have been developed and currently used to improve the diagnosis and risk management of patients with suspected acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In the last decades, several clinical scores have been developed and currently used to improve the diagnosis and risk management of patients with suspected acute appendicitis (AA). However, some of them exhibited different values of sensitivity and specificity. We conducted a systematic review and metanalysis of epidemiological studies, which compared RIPASA and Alvarado scores for the diagnosis of AA.
METHODS
This systematic review was conducted using PubMed and Web of Science databases. Selected studies had to compare RIPASA and Alvarado scores on patients with suspected AA and reported diagnostic parameters. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated by the Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Curve (HSROC) using STATA 17 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX) and MetaDiSc (version 1.4) software.
RESULTS
We included a total of 33 articles, reporting data from 35 studies. For the Alvarado score, the Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Curve (HSROC) model produced a summary sensitivity of 0.72 (95%CI = 0.66-0.77), and a summary specificity of 0.77 (95%CI = 0.70-0.82). For the RIPASA score, the HSROC model produced a summary sensitivity of 0.95 (95%CI = 0.92-0.97), and a summary specificity of 0.71 (95%CI = 0.60-0.80).
CONCLUSION
RIPASA score has higher sensitivity, but low specificity compared to Alvarado score. Since these scoring systems showed different sensitivity and specificity parameters, it is still necessary to develop novel scores for the risk assessment of patients with suspected AA.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 36178953
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275427 -
Health Sciences Review (Oxford, England) Jun 2022Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery worldwide. During the pandemic, a significant decrease in the number of accesses to the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery worldwide. During the pandemic, a significant decrease in the number of accesses to the emergency department for AA has been recorded in different countries. A systematic review of the current literature sought to determine the impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on hospital admissions and complications of AA.
METHOD
A systematic search was undertaken to identify repeated cross-sectional studies reporting the management of AA during the COVID-19 pandemic (index period) as compared to the previous year, or at the turn of lockdown (reference period). Data were abstracted on article (country of origin) and patients characteristics (adults, children [i.e. non adults, <18-year-old]), or mixed population) within the two given timeframes, including demographics, number of admissions for AA, number of appendectomies, and complicated appendectomies
RESULTS
Of 201 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 54 studies from 22 world countries were included. In total, 27 (50%) were conducted on adults, 12 (22%) on children, and 15 (28%) on a mixed patients population. The overall rate ratio of admissions for AA between the two periods was 0.94 (95%CI, 0.75-1.17), with significant differences between studies on adults (0.90 [0.74-1.09]), mixed population (0.50 [0.27-0.90]), and children (1.50 [1.01-2.22]). The overall risk ratio of complicated AA was 1.65 (1.32-2.07), ranging from 1.32 in studies on children, to 2.45 in mixed population.
CONCLUSION
The pandemic has altered the rate of admissions for AA and appendectomy, with parallel increased incidence of complicated cases in all age groups.
PubMed: 35287332
DOI: 10.1016/j.hsr.2022.100021 -
Digestive Surgery 2020Postoperative antibiotics are recommended after appendectomy for complex appendicitis to reduce infectious complications. The duration of this treatment varies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Postoperative antibiotics are recommended after appendectomy for complex appendicitis to reduce infectious complications. The duration of this treatment varies considerably between and even within institutions. The aim of this review was to critically appraise studies on duration of antibiotic treatment following appendectomy for complex appendicitis. A systematic literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines was performed. Comparative studies evaluating different durations of postoperative antibiotic therapy. Primary endpoint was intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) after appendectomy. Secondary endpoints were surgical site infection, readmission and length of hospital stay. The quality of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Pooled event rates were calculated using a random-effects model. Nine studies reporting 2006 patients with complex appendicitis were included. The methodological quality of the included articles was poor. IAA was seen in 138 patients (8,6%). Meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in IAA incidence between antibiotic treatment of ≤5 vs. >5 days (risk ratio (OR) 0.36 [95% CI 0.23-0.57] (p < 0.0001)) but not between ≤3 vs. >3 days (OR 0.81 [95% CI 0.38-1.74] (p = 0.59)). Descriptive statistics were used for secondary endpoints. The duration of postoperative antibiotic treatment is not associated with IAA following appendectomy for complex appendicitis.
Topics: Abdominal Abscess; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Appendicitis; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Postoperative Period; Surgical Wound Infection; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31163433
DOI: 10.1159/000497482 -
International Journal of Surgery... Apr 2017Acute appendicitis is the most common condition that presents with an acute abdomen needing emergency surgery. Despite this common presentation, correctly diagnosing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Acute appendicitis is the most common condition that presents with an acute abdomen needing emergency surgery. Despite this common presentation, correctly diagnosing appendicitis remains a challenge as clinical signs or positive blood results can be absent in 55% of the patients. The reported proportion of missed diagnoses of appendicitis ranges between 20% and 40%. A delay or mis-diagnosis of appendicitis can result in severe complications such as perforation, abscess formation, sepsis, and intra-abdominal adhesions. Literature has shown that patients who had a negative appendectomy suffer post-op complications and infections secondary to hospital stays; there have even been reported cases of fatality. It is therefore crucial that timely and accurate diagnosis of appendicitis is achieved to avoid complications of both non-operating as well as unnecessary surgical intervention. The aim of this review is to systematically report and analyse the latest evidence on the different approaches used in diagnosing appendicitis. We include discussions of clinical scoring systems, laboratory tests, latest innovative bio-markers and radiological imaging.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Appendix; Biomarkers; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Humans; Male; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 28279749
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.03.013 -
Surgical Endoscopy Feb 2021A De Garengeot hernia is a femoral hernia that contains the appendix. This rare type of hernia was first described by René-Jacques Croissant De Garengeot in 1731....
BACKGROUND
A De Garengeot hernia is a femoral hernia that contains the appendix. This rare type of hernia was first described by René-Jacques Croissant De Garengeot in 1731. Numerous case reports have been published since then, yet collective analysis about the presentation, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of patients with this unique hernia is lacking.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Web of Science for cases of De Garengeot hernias. Keywords searched included "De Garengeot hernia" OR "femoral appendicitis" OR "femoral hernia appendix" OR "crural hernia appendix." To facilitate review, a classification system was created based on the gross appearance of the appendix and related structures in the femoral hernia.
RESULTS
Two hundred and twenty-two cases were identified in 197 manuscripts. Cases most commonly came from Europe but have been reported worldwide. There was a female predominance (n = 180, 81.1%) and the mean age at presentation was 69.8 years. The most common presenting symptoms were a groin bulge and groin tenderness (82.4%, n = 183 and 79.7%, n = 177, respectively). A groin bulge was observed on physical exam in 95.0% (n = 211) of cases, and erythema over the hernia was present in 33.3% (n = 74). A pre-operative diagnosis of a De Garengeot hernia was established with imaging in only 31.5% (n = 70) of cases. The most common surgical approach was through a groin incision. Complications occurred in 9.5% (n = 21) of cases, most commonly surgical site infections. The most common condition of the appendix was congested/inflamed, found in 44.1% (n = 98) of cases and corresponding to class 2A in the classification system devised.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, De Garengeot hernias were found to be rare and clinically heterogeneous, as highlighted by our classification system. A systematic approach to categorizing this unique hernia may improve management decisions and help avoid complications.
Topics: Aged; Female; Hernia, Femoral; Humans; Male
PubMed: 32880011
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07934-5 -
The Ultrasound Journal Mar 2021The use of ultrasound (US) in emergency departments (ED) has become widespread. This includes both traditional US scans performed by radiology departments as well as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of ultrasound (US) in emergency departments (ED) has become widespread. This includes both traditional US scans performed by radiology departments as well as point-of-care US (POCUS) performed by bedside clinicians. There has been significant interest in better understanding the appropriate use of imaging and where opportunities to enhance cost-effectiveness may exist. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify published evidence surrounding the cost-effectiveness of US in the ED and to grade the quality of that evidence.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were considered for inclusion if they were: (1) economic evaluations, (2) studied the clinical use of ultrasound, and (3) took place in an emergency care setting. Included studies were critically appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist.
RESULTS
We identified 631 potentially relevant articles. Of these, 35 studies met all inclusion criteria and were eligible for data abstraction. In general, studies were supportive of the use of US. In particular, 11 studies formed a strong consensus that US enhanced cost-effectiveness in the investigation of pediatric appendicitis and 6 studies supported enhancements in the evaluation of abdominal trauma. Across the studies, weaknesses in methodology and reporting were common, such as lack of sensitivity analyses and inconsistent reporting of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
CONCLUSIONS
The body of existing evidence, though limited, generally demonstrates that the inclusion of US in emergency care settings allows for more cost-effective care. The most definitive evidence for improvements in cost-effectiveness surround the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis, followed by the evaluation of abdominal trauma. POCUS outside of trauma has had mixed results.
PubMed: 33687607
DOI: 10.1186/s13089-021-00216-8