[Recommendations on treatment of acute appendicitis : Recommendations of an expert group based on the current literature]

Inflammatory Signals Across the Spectrum: A Detailed Exploration of Acute Appendicitis Stages According to EAES 2015 Guidelines

Background: In this retrospective study, we evaluate the diagnostic utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) and leucocyte count within the EAES 2015 guidelines for acute appendicitis (AA) in differentiating uncomplicated (UAA) from complicated AA (CAA). Methods: Conducted at a tertiary care center in Germany, the study included 285 patients over 18 years who were diagnosed with AA from January 2019 to December 2021. Patient data included demographics, inflammatory markers, and postoperative outcomes. Results: CRP levels (Md: 60.2 mg/dL vs. 10.5 mg/dL; p < 0.001) and leucocyte count (Md: 14.4 Gpt/L vs. 13.1 Gpt/L; p = 0.016) were higher in CAA. CRP had a medium diagnostic value for detecting CAA (AUC = 0.79), with a cutoff at 44.3 mg/L, making it more likely to develop CAA. Leucocyte count showed low predictive value for CAA (AUC = 0.59). CRP ≥ 44.3 mg/L was associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications (OR: 2.9; p = 0.002) and prolonged hospitalization (OR: 3.5; p < 0.001). Conclusions: CRP, within the context of the EAES classification, presents as a valuable diagnostic marker to distinguish CAA from UAA, with a higher risk of postoperative complications and hospitalization. Leucocyte count showed low diagnostic value for the identification of CAA.

Elevated Colon Cancer Rates Linked to Prior Appendicitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study Based on Data from German General Practices

Background/Objective: The association between appendicitis and colon cancer is not yet fully understood. Previous studies have shown contradictory results. Currently, no population-based data from Germany are available with regard to the incidence of colon cancer following appendicitis. This study investigated the association between appendicitis and the incidence of colon cancer in Germany. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the incidence of colon cancer was compared for patients with appendicitis and patients without appendicitis, matched for age, sex, index year, average annual consultation frequency, and comorbidity. The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between appendicitis and the incidence of colon cancer. The evaluation was carried out using logistic regression analyses. Results: The study included 49,790 people with and without appendicitis, with a median age of 41 years. During a follow-up period of up to 15 years, 1.04% of cases with appendicitis and 0.60% of cases without appendicitis were newly diagnosed with colon cancer, with some 36.4% of colon cancer cases diagnosed within the first six months after appendicitis. Regression analyses revealed a significant association between appendicitis and colon cancer, particularly in men and in the age groups 41-50 (HR: 10.30; 95% CI: 1.03-43.82) and 18-30 years (HR: 8.17; 95% CI: 1.03-64.58). Conclusions: The present retrospective cohort study suggests an association between appendicitis and the incidence of colon cancer in Germany. Based on our results, we recommend offering a colonoscopy or at least a stool test within 12 months after appendicitis, especially for 18-50-year-olds and >60-year-olds in good general health.

[Incidental finding of appendiceal mucinous neoplasms]

Low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMN) are rare and are diagnosed in at least 0.13% of appendectomies in Germany, although significant underreporting is likely. Perforation of the tumors can result in abdominal mucinous collections, so-called pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP). The challenge in the treatment of LAMN is the adequate approach to the incidental finding of these tumors. If a mucinous neoplasm is preoperatively suspected in cases of an acute condition, usually appendicitis, it must be weighed up whether a conservative approach is justifiable or whether immediate appendectomy is necessary. If this is the case, an intraoperative perforation of the appendix must be avoided and the complete abdominal cavity must be inspected for mucin deposits. If conservative treatment is possible, further treatment should take place at a specialized center. If the neoplasm is first found incidentally during surgery, perforation of the appendix should also be avoided and the entire abdominal cavity should be inspected for a PMP. If a PMP is present cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) should be performed in a specialized center. If LAMN are found during the postoperative histological work-up, it should be evaluated whether a perforation was present and mucin collections are noted in the surgical report. In the case of LAMN without evidence of a PMP, appendectomy is the adequate treatment. In cases of intra-abdominal mucinous collections, samples should be taken and further treatment should be performed at a center with sufficient expertise. An ileocecal resection or oncological hemicolectomy is not indicated. After adequate treatment, all patients should receive a follow-up using cross-sectional imaging (preferably magnetic resonance imaging, MRI) and determination of the tumor markers CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 125.

Manifestation of acute appendicitis as known but paradox visceral side effect of ulcerative colitis anti-inflammatory therapy with januskinase-inhibitor Tofacitinib (Xeljanz™)

BACKGROUND

The etiopathogenesis of accompanying inflammatory phenomena and consequences of immunomodulation constitute a challenging and innovative field in the medical treatment of patients with autoimmune diseases.

AIM

Based on i) clinical management experience gained from this challenging clinical case and ii) selective references of reports published in the scientific medical literature, we present an unusual counterfactual scientific case report. A patient diagnosed with ulcerative colitis undergoing januskinase (JAK)-inhibitor therapy developed acuteappendicitis as an unusual complication or as a visceral side effect of immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory therapy.

METHOD

Scientific case report.

RESULTS

(case description): Medical history: A 52-year-old male presented with spasmodic pain in the right lower abdomen lasting for two days (no fever, no bowel movement changes (no stool irregularities), no vomiting).

MEDICATION USED TO DATE

Steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis treated with immunosuppressive therapy (Adalimumab administered for 10 months [next generation anti-TNFα mAb], Vendolizumab for 9 months [α4β7 integrin antagonist], Tofacitinib for 6 months); fructose intolerance, no previous abdominal surgery; medication: XeljanzTM (Tofacitinib, 5 mg 2x1; JAK-inhibitor; PFIZER PHARMA GmbH, Berlin,Germany); MutaflorTM (1x1; Ardeypharm GmbH, Herdecke, Germany).

CLINICAL FINDINGS

Pressure pain in the right lower abdomen with local muscular defense (Mc-Burney's/Lanz's point positive), no peritonism, Psoas-muscle sign positive.

DIAGNOSTIC MEASURES

Laboratory parameters: standard value of white blood cell count, CrP: 25 mg/l.-Transabdominal ultrasound revealed hypertrophic 'appendix vermiformis' with detectable target-phenomenon and surrounding fluid.

DECISION-MAKING

Indication for laparoscopic exploration.

THERAPY

Under perioperative single-shot antibiotic administration with UnacidTM, the patient underwent emergency laparoscopic appendectomy due to confirmed acute appendicitis with additional lavage and placement of local drainage.

CLINICAL COURSE

The postoperative phase was uneventful (sufficient analgetic therapy, removal of local drainage on the 2nd postoperative day). The patient was discharged four days after surgery. Histopathology confirmed ulcero-phlegmonous, acute purulent appendicitis with fibrinous purulent mesenteriolitis.

FURTHER MEASURES

Immunosuppressive therapy was continued.

CONCLUSION

Based on the paradoxon of an acute inflammatory disease (acute appendicitis) seen in the case of a patient undergoing immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory treatment using a JAK-Inhibitor for ulcerative colitis, we consider this case worthy of publication although this side effect has previously been described in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. This might be the manifestation of i) an immunomodulatory effect that reduced or at least altered mucosal defense, including an increased risk of opportunistic infections, presenting as a specific visceral 'side effect' of the JAK-Inhibitor and/or as a consequence; ii) an induced alternative inflammatory mechanism/proinflammatory signal transduction and - theoretically - an intestinal drainage defect in the segment of right colic artery with consecutive collection of necrotic cells and activation of inflammatory mediators.

Management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic. Single center data from a tertiary care hospital in Germany

Objectives

The unexpected global overload of the health system during COVID-19 pandemic has caused changes in management of acute appendicitis worldwide. Whereas conservative treatment was widely recommended, the appendicectomy remained standard therapy in Germany. We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on treatment routine for acute appendicitis at University Hospital of Magdeburg.

Methods

Adult patients with clinical and/or radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis were included in the single center retrospective study. Data was collected to patient demographics, treatment modality and outcomes including morbidity and length of stay. The patient data related to COVID-19 period from March 22, 2020 to December 31, 2021 (649 days) were compared to the Non-COVID-19 period from June 12, 2018 to March 21, 2020 (649 days). Subgroup analysis related to conservative or surgical treatment has been performed.

Results

A total of 385 patients was included in the study, 203 (52.73 %) during Non-COVID-19 period and 182 (47.27 %) during COVID-19 period. Mean age of entire collective was 43.28 years, containing 43.9 % female patients (p=0.095). Conservative treatment was accomplished in 49 patients (12.7 % of entire collective), increasing from 9.9 % to 15.9 % during COVID-19 period (p=0.074). Laparoscopic appendicectomy was performed in 99.3 % (n=152) of operated patients during COVID-19 period (p=0.013), followed by less postoperative complications compared to reference period (23.5 % vs. 13.1 %, p=0.015). The initiation of antibiotic therapy after the diagnosis increased from 37.9 % to 53.3 % (p=0.002) during COVID-19 period regardless the following treatment modality. Antibiotic treatment showed shorter duration during pandemic period (5.57 days vs. 3.16 days, p<0.001) and it was given longer in the conservative treatment group (5.63 days vs. 4.26 days, p=0.02). The overall length of stay was shorter during COVID-19 period (4.67 days vs. 4.12 days, p=0.052) and in the conservative treatment group (3.08 days vs. 4.47 days, p<0.001). However, the overall morbidity was lower during the COVID-19 period than before (17.2 % vs. 7.7 %, p=0.005) and for conservative therapy compared to appendicectomy (2 % vs. 14.3 %, p=0.016). There was no mortality documented.

Conclusions

According to our findings the COVID-19 pandemic had a relevant impact on treatment of acute appendicitis, but it was possible to maintain the traditional diagnostic and treatment pathway. Although laparoscopic appendicectomy remains a recommended procedure, the conservative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with excellent short-term outcome can be a safe alternative to surgery during potential new wave of COVID-19 pandemic and in the daily routine.

Diagnostic, Therapy and Complications in Acute Appendicitis of 19,749 Cases Based on Routine Data: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery. The gold standard treatment is surgery. Complications may occur during or after an appendectomy. In addition to age, clinically important factors for the outcome after appendicitis seems to be the comorbidities and the stage of the appendicitis at the time of the operation. Large observational data describing these facts are missing. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter observational study, all inpatients over the age of 17 years with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis in 47 hospitals of the Clinotel Hospital Group between 2010 and 2017 were included. Results: A total of 19,749 patients with acute appendicitis were operated on. The number of patients with more than five secondary diagnoses has increased from 8.4% (2010) to 14.5% (2017). The number of secondary diagnoses correlates with the ages of the patients and leads to a significantly longer hospital stay. Computer tomography (CT) has gained in importance in recent years in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. A total of 19.9% of patients received a CT in 2017. Laparoscopic appendectomy increased from 88% in 2010 to 95% in 2017 (p < 0.001). The conversion rate did not change relevant in the study period (i.e., 2.3% in 2017). Appendicitis with perforation, abscess, or generalized peritonitis was observed in 24.8% of patients. Mortality was 0.6% during the observation period and was associated with age and the number of secondary diagnoses. The analysis is based on administrative data collected primarily for billing purposes, subject to the usual limitations of such data. This includes partially incomplete clinical data. Conclusions: Multimorbidity is increasingly present in patients with acute appendicitis. Mortality is still in an acceptably low range with no increase. A CT scan is necessary for a precise diagnosis in unclear clinical situations to avoid unnecessary operations and was performed more often at the end of the study than at the beginning.

Predicting complicated appendicitis based on clinical findings: the role of Alvarado and Appendicitis Inflammatory Response scores

PURPOSE

The pre-interventional differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis is decisive for treatment. In the context of conservative therapy, the definitive diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis is mandatory. This study investigates the ability of clinical scoring systems and imaging to differentiate between the two entities.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of two cohorts from two tertiary referral centers in Switzerland and Germany. All consecutive patients underwent appendectomy between January 2008 and April 2013 (in the first cohort) or between January 2017 and June 2019 (the second cohort). Exclusion criteria did not apply as all patients found by the database search and received an appendectomy were included. Diagnostic testing and calculation of a receiver operating curve were performed to identify a cutoff for clinical scores that resulted in a minimum sensitivity of 90% to detect complicated appendicitis. The cutoff was combined with additional diagnostic imaging criteria to see if diagnostic properties could be improved.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifty-six patients were included in the analysis. Two hundred twenty patients (23%) had complicated appendicitis, and 736 patients (77%) had uncomplicated appendicitis or no inflammation. The complicated appendicitis cohort had a mean Alvarado score of 7.03 and a mean AIR of 5.21. This compared to a mean Alvarado of 6.53 and a mean AIR of 4.07 for the uncomplicated appendicitis cohort. The highest Alvarado score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 5 (sensitivity = 95%, specificity 8.99%). The highest AIR score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 3 (sensitivity 91.82%, specificity 18.53). The analysis showed that additional CT information did not improve the sensitivity of the proposed cut-offs.

CONCLUSION

AIR and Alvarado scores showed limited capability to distinguish between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis even with additional imaging in this retrospective cohort. As conservative management of appendicitis needs to exclude patients with complicated disease reliably, appendectomy seems until now to remain the safest option to prevent undertreatment of this mostly benign disease.

[The Emergency Classification of Hand Injuries: Analyzing Urgency Assessment among German Hand Surgeons]

BACKGROUND

Emergency capacities in the operating theatre are limited and often need to be split among surgical departments. Hand injuries often have to compete with other surgical disciplines for the availability of operating capacity. For this reason, an emergency classification was introduced to define a timespan in which the injury should be taken care of in the OR in order to enable the prioritizing of emergency cases in an interdisciplinary approach when capacities are scarce. However, neither valid data nor specific recommendations concerning the medical urgency of treatment or the forensic background of different hand injuries exist to this date.

PURPOSE

This work describes how emergency classifications in Germany are applied to hand surgical cases and how certain hand injuries are prioritized among different hand surgeons.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An online survey was sent to all members of the German Society for Hand Surgery twice during a time span of several months. The survey featured questions on size and type of clinic or practice and requested an assessment of urgency levels for various hand injuries (immediately - within 2 h - within 6 h - within 12 h - within 24 h or elective care). The analysis of the questionnaire and graphic presentation was carried out using Excel.

RESULTS

172 (25 %) out of 700 active members filled in the survey. Among the participants were members of university clinics, hospitals run by the German Statutory Accident Insurance, specialized clinics and primary care clinics. 15 % of participants work in a practice that offers hand-surgical treatment. First and foremost, maximum care hospitals with a hand surgical department participate in the treatment of hand injuries. 64 % of the hospitals use an emergency classification to enable the interdisciplinary prioritizing of surgical emergencies. The categorization of limb-threatening hand injuries appears to be very homogenous among participants whereas non-threatening injuries are assessed rather inconsistently.

CONCLUSION

Emergency treatment of hand injuries primarily depends on available resources and surgical capacities. The assessment of urgency and severity of injuries additionally depends on experience and education. In order to maintain the ability to compete with other surgical disciplines for surgical capacities, a standard classification of hand surgical urgencies needs to be established. As valid data on the treatment of hand injuries are still missing, further studies need to evaluate possible outcomes in order to define the timespan in which surgery should take place.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment of acute appendicitis in China

OBJECTIVE

This research aims to analyze the impact of the novel coronavirus pandemic on the hospital visits of patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

The retrospective analysis was designed to look at the treatment of acute appendicitis in the Department of General Surgery in Beijing Jishuitan Hospital before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2019-2020). Data was analyzed by the numbers of patients, sex, age, onset time, fever or not, laboratory examination, imaging test, and treatment. And we analyzed the differences between the "pre-COVID group" and "during-COVID group".

RESULTS

Compared with the year 2019, the number of acute appendicitis patients has diminished substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020), but the number elevated with the control of the pandemic. Even if we did not find the differences of the treatment before and during the pandemic (P = 0.932), the onset time to emergency was significantly longer (P < 0.001), and more patients had showed fever (P < 0.001) during the COVID-19 pandemic. And the total number of white blood cells and C reactive protein level were significantly higher in 2020 than those in 2019 (P = 0.006, 0.003). And the same result was found in patients with appendiceal fecalith (P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

During the pandemic of the new coronavirus pneumonia, the number of patients with acute appendix treatment dropped significantly, mainly because it took longer than before, and the condition was more severe. It can be seen that the new coronary pneumonia has a great impact on the patients' medical treatment behavior, and the active prevention and treatment of the new coronavirus pneumonia is currently an important and urgent issue.

Robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery in the elderly patient: experiences from a high-volume centre

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery (RPS) has fundamentally developed over the past few years. For subgroups, e.g. elderly patients, applicability and safety of RPS still needs to be defined. Given prognosticated demographic developments, we aim to assess the role of RPS based on preoperative, operative and postoperative parameters.

METHODS

We included 129 patients undergoing RPS at our institution between 2017 and 2020. Eleven patients required conversion to open surgery and were excluded from further analysis. We divided patients into two groups; ≥ 70 years old (Group 1; n = 32) and < 70 years old (Group 2; n = 86) at time of resection.

RESULTS

Most preoperative characteristics were similar in both groups. However, number of patients with previous abdominal surgery was significantly higher in patients ≥ 70 years old (78% vs 37%, p < 0.0001). Operative characteristics did not significantly differ between both groups. Although patients ≥ 70 years old stayed significantly longer at ICU (1.8 vs 0.9 days; p = 0.037), length of hospital stay and postoperative morbidity were equivalent between the groups.

CONCLUSION

RPS is safe and feasible in elderly patients and shows non-inferiority when compared with younger patients. However, prospectively collected data is needed to define the role of RPS in elderly patients accurately. Trial registration Clinical Trial Register: Deutschen Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS; German Clinical Trials Register). Clinical Registration Number: DRKS00017229 (retrospectively registered, Date of Registration: 2019/07/19, Date of First Enrollment: 2017/10/18).

Appendicitis during the COVID-19 lockdown: results of a multicenter analysis in Germany

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed medical care worldwide. General surgery has been affected in elective procedures, yet the implications for emergency surgery are unclear. The current study analyzes the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020 on appendicitis treatment in Germany.

Methods

Hospitals that provided emergency surgical care during the COVID-19 lockdown were invited to participate. All patients diagnosed with appendicitis during the lockdown period (10 weeks) and, as a comparison group, patients from the same period in 2019 were analyzed. Clinical and laboratory parameters, intraoperative and pathological findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

Results

A total of 1915 appendectomies from 41 surgical departments in Germany were included. Compared to 2019 the number of appendectomies decreased by 13.5% (1.027 to 888, p=0.003) during the first 2020 COVID-19 lockdown. The delay between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation was substantially longer in the COVID-19 risk group and for the elderly. The rate of complicated appendicitis increased (58.2 to 64.4%), while the absolute number of complicated appendicitis decreased from 597 to 569, (p=0.012). The rate of negative appendectomies decreased significantly (6.7 to 4.6%; p=0.012). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality, however, did not change.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 lockdown had significant effects on abdominal emergency surgery in Germany. These seem to result from a stricter selection and a longer waiting time between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation for risk patients. However, the standard of emergency surgical care in Germany was maintained.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-021-02090-3.