-
Endoscopy Aug 2022Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) is a new and minimally invasive technique for the treatment of acute appendicitis. This study aimed to assess the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) is a new and minimally invasive technique for the treatment of acute appendicitis. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and clinical outcomes of ERAT versus laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.
METHODS
We adopted propensity score matching (1:1) to compare ERAT and laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis between April 2017 and March 2020. We reviewed 2880 patients with suspected acute appendicitis, of whom 422 patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis met the matching criteria (ERAT 79; laparoscopic appendectomy 343), yielding 78 pairs of patients.
RESULTS
The rate of curative treatment within 1 year after ERAT was 92.1 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 83.8 % to 96.3 %). The percentage of patients recording visual analog scale values of ≤ 3 for pain at 6 hours after treatment was 94.7 % (95 %CI 87.2 % to 97.9 %) in the ERAT group, which was significantly higher than that in the laparoscopic appendectomy group (83.3 %; 95 %CI 73.5 % to 90.0 %). Median procedure time and median hospital length of stay were significantly lower in the ERAT group compared with the laparoscopic appendectomy group. At 1 year, the median recurrence time was 50 days (interquartile range 25-127) in the ERAT group. The overall adverse event rate was 24.4 % (95 %CI 14.8 % to 33.9 %) in the laparoscopic appendectomy group and 18.4 % (95 %CI 9.7 % to 27.1 %) in the ERAT group, with no significant difference between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
ERAT was a technically feasible method of treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis compared with laparoscopic appendectomy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35021234
DOI: 10.1055/a-1737-6381 -
JAMA Pediatrics May 2017Antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis is effective in adult patients, but its application in pediatric patients remains controversial. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis is effective in adult patients, but its application in pediatric patients remains controversial.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the safety and efficacy of antibiotic treatment vs appendectomy as the primary therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in pediatric patients.
DATA SOURCES
The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized clinical trials were searched through April 17, 2016. The search was limited to studies published in English. Search terms included appendicitis, antibiotics, appendectomy, randomized controlled trial, controlled clinical trial, randomized, placebo, drug therapy, randomly, and trial.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials and prospective clinical controlled trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in pediatric patients (aged 5-18 years) were included in the meta-analysis. The outcomes included at least 2 of the following terms: success rate of antibiotic treatment and appendectomy, complications, readmissions, length of stay, total cost, and disability days.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers. The quality of the included studies was examined in accordance with the Cochrane guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa criteria. Data were pooled using a logistic fixed-effects model, and the subgroup pooled risk ratio with or without appendicolith was estimated.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the success rate of treatment. The hypothesis was formulated before data collection.
RESULTS
A total of 527 articles were screened. In 5 unique studies, 404 unique patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (aged 5-15 years) were enrolled. Nonoperative treatment was successful in 152 of 168 patients (90.5%), with a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects risk ratio of 8.92 (95% CI, 2.67-29.79; heterogeneity, P = .99; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that the risk for treatment failure in patients with appendicolith increased, with a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects risk ratio of 10.43 (95% CI, 1.46-74.26; heterogeneity, P = .91; I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This meta-analysis shows that antibiotics as the initial treatment for pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis may be feasible and effective without increasing the risk for complications. However, the failure rate, mainly caused by the presence of appendicolith, is higher than for appendectomy. Surgery is preferably suggested for uncomplicated appendicitis with appendicolith.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adolescent; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Length of Stay; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28346589
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0057 -
JAMA Surgery Mar 2022Use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis is safe and has been found to be noninferior to appendectomy based on self-reported health status at 30 days.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis is safe and has been found to be noninferior to appendectomy based on self-reported health status at 30 days. Identifying patient characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of appendectomy within 30 days in those who initiate antibiotics could support more individualized decision-making.
OBJECTIVE
To assess patient factors associated with undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics for appendicitis.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
In this cohort study using data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial, characteristics among patients who initiated antibiotics were compared between those who did and did not undergo appendectomy within 30 days. The study was conducted at 25 US medical centers; participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020. A total of 1552 participants with acute appendicitis were randomized to antibiotics (776 participants) or appendectomy (776 participants). Data were analyzed from September 2020 to July 2021.
EXPOSURES
Appendectomy vs antibiotics.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Conditional logistic regression models were fit to estimate associations between specific patient factors and the odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days after initiating antibiotics. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding participants who underwent appendectomy within 30 days for nonclinical reasons.
RESULTS
Of 776 participants initiating antibiotics (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [13.4] years; 286 [37%] women and 490 [63%] men), 735 participants had 30-day outcomes, including 154 participants (21%) who underwent appendectomy within 30 days. After adjustment for other factors, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31), radiographic finding of wider appendiceal diameter (OR per 1-mm increase, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18), and presence of appendicolith (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.28-3.10) were associated with increased odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days. Characteristics that are often associated with increased risk of complications (eg, advanced age, comorbid conditions) and those clinicians often use to describe appendicitis severity (eg, fever: OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.82-1.98) were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. The sensitivity analysis limited to appendectomies performed for clinical reasons provided similar results regarding appendicolith (adjusted OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.49-3.91).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This cohort study found that presence of an appendicolith was associated with a nearly 2-fold increased risk of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics. Clinical characteristics often used to describe severity of appendicitis were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. This information may help guide more individualized decision-making for people with appendicitis.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Appendix; Cohort Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35019975
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.6900 -
Canadian Journal of Surgery. Journal... Apr 1999
Topics: Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 10223068
DOI: No ID Found -
World Journal of Surgery Apr 2023Save for the contribution of Charles McBurney, who described his eponymous point and the appendicectomy incision, the history of appendicectomy is largely unknown among... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Save for the contribution of Charles McBurney, who described his eponymous point and the appendicectomy incision, the history of appendicectomy is largely unknown among the medical profession. This review traces the history from the first anatomical depiction of the appendix to the development of open appendicectomy and the recent minimally invasive and non-operative methods.
METHODS
Historical articles, monographs and books containing anatomical descriptions of the vermiform appendix and reports of appendicitis and its surgical treatment were retrieved after searching the PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase databases from their inception to 31 March 2022.
RESULTS
The first inadvertent appendicectomy was performed during an operation for a groin hernia by Cookesley in 1731, and Mestivier was the first to drain a right iliac fossa abscess, due to appendicitis, in 1757. Krönlein performed the first appendicectomy for acute appendicitis in 1884 but his patient died. The first successful appendicectomy for acute appendicitis leading to patient survival was by Morton in 1887. In 1976, Wirschafter and Kaufman performed an inadvertent colonoscopic appendicectomy and, in 1980, Semm carried out the first laparoscopic appendicectomy. The first appendicectomy via a natural orifice (transgastric) appendicectomy was by Rao and Reddy in 2004.
CONCLUSION
This historical review charts the development of surgical knowledge concerning the management of appendicitis, from the first anatomical drawings of the appendix and descriptions of appendicitis to the development of surgical and conservative treatments up to the present day. It also corrects some inaccuracies of attribution in previous historical reviews.
Topics: Humans; Appendicitis; Appendectomy; Appendix; Acute Disease; Abscess; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 36581691
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06874-6 -
British Medical Journal Sep 1978
Topics: Appendectomy; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Quality of Life; State Medicine; United Kingdom
PubMed: 101265
DOI: No ID Found -
Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal Nov 2023Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies. There has been an increasing use of robotic abdominal surgery. However, it remains underutilised in... (Review)
Review
Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies. There has been an increasing use of robotic abdominal surgery. However, it remains underutilised in emergency settings. This study aimed to systematically review robotic appendicectomy (RA) feasibility. A 20-year systematic review was performed, along with quality assessment. The research protocol was registered with PROSPERO. The search yielded 1,242 citations, including 9 articles. The mean quality score was 10.72 ± 2.56. The endpoints across the studies were rate of conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, blood loss and operative time. RA is a safe, feasible technique that can be performed in elective and emergency settings with minimal blood loss. The operative time and hospital stay were within acceptable limits. Robotic surgery's major drawback is its high cost and limited availability. Future studies evaluating RA with a focus on its application during emergencies and its cost-effectiveness are recommended.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Emergencies; Feasibility Studies; Appendectomy; Appendicitis
PubMed: 38090254
DOI: 10.18295/squmj.7.2023.043 -
JAMA Network Open Jul 2022In the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
In the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized to receive antibiotics had outpatient management with hospital discharge within 24 hours. If outpatient management is safe, it could increase convenience and decrease health care use and costs.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the use and safety of outpatient management of acute appendicitis.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This cohort study, which is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, included 776 adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis who received antibiotics at 25 US hospitals from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020.
EXPOSURES
Participants randomized to antibiotics (intravenous then oral) could be discharged from the emergency department based on clinician judgment and prespecified criteria (hemodynamically stable, afebrile, oral intake tolerated, pain controlled, and follow-up confirmed). Outpatient management and hospitalization were defined as discharge within or after 24 hours, respectively.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Outcomes compared among patients receiving outpatient vs inpatient care included serious adverse events (SAEs), appendectomies, health care encounters, satisfaction, missed workdays at 7 days, and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) score at 30 days. In addition, appendectomy incidence among outpatients and inpatients, unadjusted and adjusted for illness severity, was compared.
RESULTS
Among 776 antibiotic-randomized participants, 42 (5.4%) underwent appendectomy within 24 hours and 8 (1.0%) did not receive their first antibiotic dose within 24 hours, leaving 726 (93.6%) comprising the study population (median age, 36 years; range, 18-86 years; 462 [63.6%] male; 437 [60.2%] White). Of these participants, 335 (46.1%; site range, 0-89.2%) were discharged within 24 hours, and 391 (53.9%) were discharged after 24 hours. Over 7 days, SAEs occurred in 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-2.6) per 100 outpatients and 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.9) per 100 inpatients; in the appendicolith subgroup, SAEs occurred in 2.3 (95% CI, 0.3-8.2) per 100 outpatients vs 2.8 (95% CI, 0.6-7.9) per 100 inpatients. During this period, appendectomy occurred in 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9%-13.7%) of outpatients and 14.1% (95% CI, 10.8%-18.0%) of inpatients; adjusted analysis demonstrated a similar difference in incidence (-4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to 0.6). At 30 days, appendectomies occurred in 12.6% (95% CI, 9.1%-16.7%) of outpatients and 19.0% (95% CI, 15.1%-23.4%) of inpatients. Outpatients missed fewer workdays (2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.3-2.9 days) than did inpatients (3.8 days; 95% CI, 3.4-4.3 days) and had similar frequency of return health care visits and high satisfaction and EQ-5D scores.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings support that outpatient antibiotic management is safe for selected adults with acute appendicitis, with no greater risk of complications or appendectomy than hospital care, and should be included in shared decision-making discussions of patient preferences for outcomes associated with nonoperative and operative care.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Cohort Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Outpatients
PubMed: 35796152
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.20039 -
Neurology India 2020The association between appendectomy and multiple sclerosis (MS) is unknown. In this study, we explored the association between appendectomy and MS and neuromyelitis...
BACKGROUND
The association between appendectomy and multiple sclerosis (MS) is unknown. In this study, we explored the association between appendectomy and MS and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
MS and NMOSD patients older than 40 were identified from neurology records from hospitals in Malaysia. The diagnoses were based on the Revised McDonald (2010) and Wingerchuk (2015) criteria. Controls were sampled from Malaysia's normal population. Individuals were interviewed telephonically or face-to-face. The age inclusion criterion (over 40) differentiated high or low lifetime risk of appendicitis, as appendicitis incidence is rare after 40.
RESULTS
49 MS, 71 NMOSD, and 880 controls met the inclusion criteria. Seventy-two individuals (9 MS, 4 NMOSD, 59 control) had undergone appendectomy. Appendectomy rates were 18.37% in the MS group (95% CI 7.5-29.2%), 5.6% in the NMOSD group (0.3%, 11%), and 6.7% among controls (5.1%, 8.4%), (MS vs NMOSD P = 0.036, MS vs controls P = 0.007). Binary regression analysis showed that MS was an independent risk factor for appendectomy (OR 2.938, 95% CI 1.302, 6.633, P = 0.009). NMOSD showed no association with appendectomy.
CONCLUSION
MS is positively associated with appendectomy, unlike ulcerative colitis, which is negatively associated. We hypothesize that there is a commonality in the microflora in persons who have had these two illnesses.
Topics: Appendectomy; Humans; Incidence; Multiple Sclerosis; Neuromyelitis Optica
PubMed: 32859827
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.293469 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2014The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is... (Review)
Review
The use of laparoscopy has been established in improving perioperative and postoperative outcomes for patients with simple appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with less wound pain, less wound infection, a shorter hospital stay, and faster overall recovery when compared to the open appendectomy for uncomplicated cases. In the past two decades, the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of perforated appendicitis to take the advantages of minimally invasiveness has increased. This article reviewed the prevalence, approaches, safety disclaimers, perioperative and postoperative outcomes of the laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of patients with perforated appendicitis. Special issues including the conversion, interval appendectomy, laparoscopic approach for elderly or obese patient are also discussed to define the role of laparoscopic treatment for patients with perforated appendicitis.
Topics: Age Factors; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Health Care Costs; Humans; Laparoscopy; Obesity; Patient Selection; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25339821
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i39.14338