Efficacy and Safety of Non-Operative Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis Compared to Appendectomy: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis to Compare the Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Non-operative Management With Early Operative Management of Simple Appendicitis in Children After the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management (NOM) of simple appendicitis is becoming an increasingly researched treatment option. This systematic review aims to describe the short and long-term failure rates of NOM and the complication rate of appendicectomy in children with simple appendicitis.

METHODS

The systematic review was registered a priori (CRD42022322149). Study inclusion criteria are: participants aged ≤ 18 years of age; groups undergoing both NOM and appendicectomy for simple appendicitis; outcomes including one or more of: NOM failure rate at 30 days or 1 year and beyond; study design: RCT or case control study. Four databases were searched and 3 reviewers determined study eligibility and data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed and meta-analysis was performed using Stata.

RESULTS

The database search identified 2731 articles, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria; 4 RCTs and 10 case controlled studies. All studies had moderate-serious risk of bias. There were no deaths in either group in any study. Meta-analysis demonstrated a 30 day failure rate of 20 % (95 % CI 11-29 %) and 11 studies reported failure rate at 1 year or beyond at 32 % (95 % CI 25-38 %). Rates of significant complications of appendicectomy was 1 % (95 % CI 0-1 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-operative management of simple appendicitis in children is safe, with moderate early success. The failure rate increases over time, resulting in eventual appendicectomy in a third of the children diagnosed with appendicitis. These data will enable clinicians to have an informed discussion with children and their parents about their treatment options for simple appendicitis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

SAGES guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is an extremely common disease with a variety of medical and surgical treatment approaches. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians and patients in decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted from 2010 to 2022 to answer 8 key questions relating to the diagnosis of appendicitis, operative or nonoperative management, and specific technical and post-operative issues for appendectomy. The results of this systematic review were then presented to a panel of adult and pediatric surgeons. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts.

RESULTS

Conditional recommendations were made in favor of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis being managed operatively, either delayed (>12h) or immediate operation (<12h), either suction and lavage or suction alone, no routine drain placement, treatment with short-term antibiotics postoperatively for complicated appendicitis, and complicated appendicitis previously treated nonoperatively undergoing interval appendectomy. A conditional recommendation signals that the benefits of adhering to a recommendation probably outweigh the harms although it does also indicate uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations should provide guidance with regard to current controversies in appendicitis. The panel also highlighted future research opportunities where the evidence base can be strengthened.

Is non-operative treatment of acute appendicitis possible: A narrative review

Introduction

Acute appendicitis (AA) represents the most frequent surgical emergency. Perforation was long considered the ultimate outcome of AA, prompting appendectomy; which remains the standard treatment. New data have clarified the role of the appendix, justifying conservative treatment. This narrative review aims to summarize the evidence regarding the non-operative treatment (NOT) of AA in adults.

Methods

The literature search was performed via the PubMed Medline database. Our criteria-based selection resulted in a total of 48 articles for review.

Results

Recent trials and meta-analyses have assessed NOT, which support primary antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated AA. Although it has a significant recurrence and failure rate, NOT does not appear to increase the risk of appendicular perforation. Moreover, NOT compared with appendectomy, seems to be associated with less morbidity, lower cost of care and preserved quality of life.

Conclusion

First-line NOT seems to be a reasonable approach for the treatment of uncomplicated CT-confirmed AA. Careful patient screening would definitely enhance the success rate.

Age as an Exclusion Criterion for Nonoperative Management in Simple Acute Appendicitis in Children

OBJECTIVE

 Nonoperative management (NOM) for simple acute appendicitis (SAA) is an acceptable mode of treatment in healthy children. Previous studies of NOM routinely excluded young children (< 5 years); however, the effect of age on NOM failure has not been directly assessed. Efficiency of NOM in young adults is questionable. Therefore, adolescents may also be at greater risk of NOM failure. Our aim was to investigate the effect of age on NOM failure.

METHODS

 This is a retrospective analysis of children with SAA who received NOM between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2021, at our institution. NOM failure was defined by subsequent appendectomy. Age was assessed as a continuous variable, and we also compared different age subgroups.

RESULTS

 In this study, 151 children were included (60% male), mean age 11.2 ± 3.2 years (range: 5-17). Overall, 66 children (44%) failed NOM, 90% of them within the first year (median 7 weeks). Ten percent of the cohort were younger than 6 years of age and 33% of them failed NOM (p = 0.39). Per 1 year increase in age, the odds of NOM failure increased by 12% (p = 0.027). Children over 14 years of age had 2.46 times higher odds to fail NOM (p = 0.03). These higher odds remained after adjusting for appendiceal diameter and appendicolith. Linear regression showed a decrease by a factor of 12 at the time of NOM failure with every 1-year increase in age (β = -12, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

 The risk of NOM failure in children increases with age; therefore, age should be considered when deciding on the optimal management of SAA, especially in adolescents. Effectiveness of NOM in children younger than 6 years is noninferior to older children and therefore should not be excluded.

The Role of Manual Detorsion in Pediatric Testicular Torsion During the Global COVID-19 Pandemic: Experience From 2 Centres

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of emergency manual detorsion as first line management for testicular torsion in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study includes 90 pediatric patients ≤14 years old with diagnosis of testicular torsion made at 2 tertiary centers between October 2020 and June 2022. Variables examined included age, presentation delay, surgical wait time, number of attempts at manual testicular detorsion, and manual testicular detorsion success. All patients finally underwent surgery, including contralateral testicular fixation. Outcomes included predictors of successful manual detorsion, testicular findings at surgery, and operation time.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 11.51 (2.64) years. Mean presentation delay was 11.76 (13.79) hours. Detorsion was attempted in 72 (80%) patients, resulting successful in 58 (80.5%). Surgical wait time after successful manual detorsion was 22.85 (16.94) hours. On multivariable analysis, successful manual detorsion was associated with a presentation delay<6 hours (odds ratios [OR] 0.154, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.036-0.655, P = 0.01) and absence of scrotal edema (OR 0.171, 95% CI 0.038-0.769, P = 0.02). Vice versa, a heterogeneous echo-texture (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.007-0.461, P = 0.007) and absent blood flow on Doppler ultrasound scan (OR 0.256, 95% CI 0.067-0.971, P = 0.045) were significantly associated with the likelihood of manual detorsion failure.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, manual detorsion provided safe and effective emergency treatment for pediatric testicular torsion, especially in absence of edema and when presentation delay is <6 hours. This maneuver should be more widely attempted immediately after diagnosis as temporizing rescue.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment and appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment and appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHODS

We searched the randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing appendectomy with antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the electronic database including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, and WanFang. The primary outcomes included complication-free treatment success at 1 year, complications, surgical complications, and the complicated appendicitis rates. Secondary outcomes included negative appendicitis, length of hospital stay, the quality of life at 1 month, and the impact of an appendicolith on antibiotic therapy.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled studies were included. Compared with surgery group, the antibiotic group decreased the complication-free treatment success at 1 year (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73-0.91; z = 3.65; p = 0.000). Statistically significance was existed between antibiotic group and surgical group with both surgical types(open and laparoscopic) (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.31-0.58; z = 5.36; p = 0.000), while no between the antibiotic treatment and laparoscopic surgery (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.41-1.24; z = 1.19; p = 0.236). There was no statistically significant differences between two groups of surgical complications (RR 1.38; 95% CI 0.70-2.73; z = 0.93; p = 0.353), the complicated appendicitis rate (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.36-1.42; z = 0.96; p = 0.338), negative appendectomy rate (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.69-1.79; z = 0.43; p = 0.670), duration of hospital stay (SMD 0.08; 95%CI -0.11-0.27; z = 0.80; p = 0.422), and quality of life at 1 month (SMD 0.09; 95%CI -0.03-0.20; z = 1.53; p = 0.127). However, in the antibiotic treatment group, appendicolith rates were statistically higher in those whose symptoms did not improve (RR 2.94; 95% CI 1.28-6.74; z = 2.55; p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the cure rate of antibiotics is lower than surgery, antibiotic treatment is still a reasonable option for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis who do not want surgery without having to worry about complications or complicating the original illness.

Appendiceal Endometriosis: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Objective: the purpose of this review was to evaluate the prevalence of appendiceal endometriosis and the safety of concomitant appendectomy in women with endometriosis or pelvic pain. Materials and Methods: We searched the electronic databases Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science (WOS). The search was not subject to any limitation in terms of time or method. The primary research question was: what is the prevalence of appendiceal endometriosis? The secondary research question was: is it safe to perform appendectomy during surgery for endometriosis? Publications that reported data about appendiceal endometriosis or appendectomy in women with endometriosis were reviewed regarding the inclusion criteria. Results: We found 1418 records. After review and screening, we included 75 studies published between 1975 and 2021. With regard to the first question of the review, we found 65 eligible studies and divided these into the following two categories: (a) endometriosis of the appendix presenting as acute appendicitis, and (b) endometriosis of the appendix as an incidental finding in gynecological surgery. Forty-four case reports described appendiceal endometriosis in women who were admitted for the treatment of pain in the right-sided lower abdomen. Endometriosis of the appendix was observed in 2.67% (range, 0.36-23%) of women who were admitted due to acute appendicitis. In addition, appendiceal endometriosis was an incidental finding during gynecological surgery in 7.23% of cases (range, 1-44.3%). With regard to the second question of the review, which was the safety of appendectomy in women with endometriosis or pelvic pain, we found 11 eligible studies. Reviewed cases had no significant intraoperative or follow-up complications during the 12 weeks. Conclusion: Based on the reviewed studies, coincidental appendectomy appears reasonably safe and was associated with no complications in the cases reviewed for the present report.

Techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix resection: insights from the ESTES SnapAppy study

INTRODUCTION

Surgically managed appendicitis exhibits great heterogeneity in techniques for mesoappendix transection and appendix amputation from its base. It is unclear whether a particular surgical technique provides outcome benefit or reduces complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We undertook a pre-specified subgroup analysis of all patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at index admission during SnapAppy (ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT04365491). We collected routine, anonymized observational data regarding surgical technique, patient demographics and indices of disease severity, without change to clinical care pathway or usual surgeon preference. Outcome measures of interest were the incidence of complications, unplanned reoperation, readmission, admission to the ICU, death, hospital length of stay, and procedure duration. We used Poisson regression models with robust standard errors to calculate incident rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Three-thousand seven hundred sixty-eight consecutive adult patients, included from 71 centers in 14 countries, were followed up from date of admission for 90 days. The mesoappendix was divided hemostatically using electrocautery in 1564(69.4%) and an energy device in 688(30.5%). The appendix was amputated by division of its base between looped ligatures in 1379(37.0%), with a stapler in 1421(38.1%) and between clips in 929(24.9%). The technique for securely dividing the appendix at its base in acutely inflamed (AAST Grade 1) appendicitis was equally divided between division between looped ligatures, clips and stapled transection. However, the technique used differed in complicated appendicitis (AAST Grade 2 +) compared with uncomplicated (Grade 1), with a shift toward transection of the appendix base by stapler (58% vs. 38%; p < 0.001). While no statistical difference in outcomes could be detected between different techniques for division of appendix base, decreased risk of any [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.58 (0.41-0.82), p = 0.002] and severe [adjusted IRR (95% CI): 0.33 (0.11-0.96), p = 0.045] complications could be detected when using energy devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Safe mesoappendix transection and appendix resection are accomplished using heterogeneous techniques. Technique selection for both mesoappendix transection and appendix resection correlates with AAST grade. Higher grade led to more ultrasonic tissue transection and stapled appendix resection. Higher AAST appendicitis grade also correlated with infection-related complication occurrence. Despite the overall well-tolerated heterogeneity of approaches to acute appendicitis, increasing disease acuity or complexity appears to encourage homogeneity of intraoperative surgical technique toward advanced adjuncts.

Comparación de la seguridad y la eficacia del uso de antibióticos frente a la apendicectomía en el tratamiento de la apendicitis no complicada en adultos. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis

Introducción. La apendicitis aguda es una emergencia quirúrgica frecuente, en la cual el tratamiento de tipo conservador basado en antibióticos se ha identificado como una opción terapéutica que necesita seguir siendo estudiada. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar las diferencias en seguridad y eficacia del uso de antibióticos en comparación con la apendicectomía en adultos con apendicitis no complicada. Métodos. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis. Se encontraron 452 estudios; después de una selección, 45 se evaluaron en texto completo y 15 para calidad metodológica; 11 estudios fueron seleccionados y 9 incluidos en el metaanálisis. Resultados. Se contó con 3186 participantes, de los cuales 1512 fueron tratados con terapia antibiótica y 1674 sometidos a apendicectomía. Se identificó estancia hospitalaria más corta en los pacientes sometidos a apendicectomía (SMD: 0,28; IC95%: 0,14 a 0,41). Para los pacientes tratados con terapia antibiótica, se evidenció puntajes de riesgo menores en las escalas de diagnóstico de apendicitis (SMD: -0,13; IC95%: -0,22 a -0,04), menor éxito terapéutico en un 16 % (RR: 0,84; IC95%: 0,77 a 0,92) y reducción del riesgo de complicaciones del 63 % (RR: 0,37; IC95%: 0,25 a 0,53). Se encontró alta heterogeneidad y riesgo de sesgo de publicación. Conclusiones. La terapia antibiótica necesita mayor evidencia para desenlaces como calidad de vida, satisfacción, dolor, o complicaciones específicas, entre otros, que permitan hacer comparaciones más contundentes. Los pacientes que consideren el manejo conservador necesitan ser adecuadamente asesorados y monitorizados para optimizar sus posibilidades de resultados favorables y la oportuna identificación de complicaciones que necesiten de otros abordajes.

Heart Rate Variability May Predict the Severity of Appendicitis: A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of heart rate variability (HRV) in predicting pre-operative severity of appendicitis.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 171 cases of acute appendicitis who underwent appendectomy were enrolled. Pre-anesthetic pulse rate of included patients were documented while the severity of appendicitis was determined by intra-operative evidences reported by two independent surgeons. Demographic characteristics, laboratory variables, and Alvarado criteria were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 28.75±4.21 years; 54% were men. HRV negatively associated the severity of appendix inflammation. A positive association was found between HRV and omental wrapping and Alvarado score (p<0.01). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated that HRV could differentiate simple and complicated appendicitis with a sensitivity of 78.5% and specificity of 97.2%.

CONCLUSION

The present findings revealed that HRV may predict the pre-operative severity of appendicitis and help differentiate simple and complicated appendicitis.

Evolving Trends in the Management of Acute Appendicitis During COVID-19 Waves: The ACIE Appy II Study

BACKGROUND

In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak.

METHODS

From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study.

RESULTS

A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM.

CONCLUSION

Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide.