Routine histopathological examination of appendectomy specimens in children: is there any rationale?

Agreement between histopathological and intraoperative classifications for pediatric appendicitis and its relationship with the post-operative clinical outcome

INTRODUCTION

Some studies have shown poor agreement between intraoperative and histopathological classifications for appendicitis, despite their routine use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the agreement between histopathological and intraoperative classifications for pediatric appendicitis and evaluate the predictive potential of these classifications for the post-operative outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective, longitudinal, observational single-center study, carried out with 485 patients up to15 years of age, with a confirmed diagnosis of acute appendicitis by histopathological evaluation. The histopathological results classified the appendices as uncomplicated appendicitis when there was confirmation of the diagnosis of appendicitis without necrosis or perforation and complicated appendicitis when there was extensive necrotic tissue in the outer layer of the appendix or signs of perforation. The intraoperative findings were classified as uncomplicated appendicitis when the appendix presented with hyperemia and edema or fibrinous exudate and complicated appendicitis when the appendix showed necrosis, abscess, or perforation. The kappa index determined the agreement and the prediction relationships using a generalized linear model.

RESULTS

43.9% of cases were classified as complicated appendicitis by histopathological evaluation and 49.7% by intraoperative classification. The agreement analysis between the histopathological and intraoperative classification showed a moderate agreement, with a Kappa index of 0.419 (0.337-0.501). There was an association (P < 0.05) between the intraoperative classification and the post-operative clinical outcomes (time to start feeding, fever, intraabdominal collection, length of stay, the need for antibiotic therapy changing, and need for ICU). There was no association between histopathological classification and post-operative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The agreement between the two classifications was moderate, and the intraoperative classification was able to predict the post-operative clinical outcomes.

Not only appendicitis: rare appendix disorders manifesting as surgical emergencies in children

Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal pathology in children. However, other rare non-inflammatory non-neoplastic disorders involving the appendix may manifest as surgical emergencies. This study aimed to describe these atypical entities and present representative cases. The database of a tertiary children's medical center was reviewed for all the patients aged 0-18 years who underwent urgent appendectomy between June 2014 and December 2019, for rare disorders of the appendix unrelated to inflammatory or neoplastic processes. Of 1367 patients who underwent appendectomy, 1345 were operated urgently or emergently. Of these, six, all males, mean age 32.6 months (range 0.7-76), underwent appendectomy for rare surgical complications that involved the appendix. These included torsion of the appendix (2), a strangulated internal hernia through an appendicular ring (1) or through a mesoappendix gap (1), an incarcerated appendix in an acute hernia sac (1), and appendiceal intussusception (1). In all cases, the role of the appendix in the pathologic process was unexpected and came as a surprise to the surgeon. During a median follow-up of 4.2 months (range 1-8 months), one patient underwent relaparotomy for small bowel obstruction 4 weeks after the original procedure.Conclusion: The appendix in children can be the source of rare pathological disorders that present as surgical emergencies. Familiarity with these entities may aid in achieving accurate preoperative diagnosis and contribute to surgical team orientation on exploratory laparotomy. However, correct diagnosis is often only established during timely surgical intervention.

Routine histopathologic examination of the appendix after appendectomy for presumed appendicitis: Is it really necessary? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Owing to substantial costs and increasing interest in the nonoperative management of appendicitis, the necessity of routine histopathologic examination of appendectomy specimens is being questioned. The aim of this study was to determine whether routine histopathologic examination after appendectomy for suspected appendicitis should still be performed.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies listing the histopathologic diagnoses after appendectomy for suspected appendicitis. Main outcomes were the incidence of histopathologically proven aberrant findings, the ability of surgeons to recognize unexpected appendiceal pathology intraoperatively, and the percentage of aberrant findings resulting in a change of postoperative management. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with 57,357 patients were included. The pooled percentage of aberrant findings was 2.52% (95% confidence interval 1.81-3.51). Neoplasms were found in 0.71% (95% confidence interval 0.54-0.94). Findings of the intraoperative assessment by the surgeon were reported for 82 of the 2,718 (3.0%) unexpected diagnoses, with great variation between studies. The impact on postoperative management was described for 237 of 2,718 (8.7%) aberrant findings. Of these, 166 (70.0%) resulted in a change of postoperative management.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, it remains unclear how many of the unexpected appendiceal pathologies with clinical consequences can be identified intraoperatively by the surgeon. Until reliable data on the safety and potential cost savings of a selective policy becomes available, we advise sending appendectomy specimens routinely for histopathologic examination.

Safety and cost analysis of selective histopathological examination following appendicectomy and cholecystectomy (FANCY study): protocol and statistical analysis plan of a prospective observational multicentre study

INTRODUCTION

Routine histopathological examination following appendicectomy and cholecystectomy has significant financial implications and comprises a substantial portion of the pathologists' workload, while the incidence of unexpected pathology is low. The aim of the selective histopathological examination Following AppeNdicectomy and CholecystectomY (FANCY) study is to investigate the oncological safety and potential cost savings of selective histopathological examination based on macroscopic assessment performed by the surgeon.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a Dutch multicentre prospective observational study, in which removed appendices and gallbladders will be systematically assessed by the operating surgeon for macroscopic abnormalities suspicious for malignant neoplasms. After visual inspection and digital palpation of the removed specimen, the operating surgeon will report whether macroscopic abnormalities suspicious for a malignant neoplasm are present, and if he or she believes additional microscopic examination by the pathologist is indicated. Regardless of the surgeon's assessment, all specimens will be sent for histopathological examination. In this way, routine histopathological examination can be compared with a hypothetical situation in which specimens are routinely examined by surgeons and only sent to the pathologist on indication. The two main outcomes are oncological safety and potential cost savings of a selective policy. Oncological safety of selective histopathological examination will be assessed by calculating the number of patients in whom a histopathological diagnosis of an appendiceal neoplasm or gallbladder cancer with clinical consequences benefitting the patient would have been missed. A cost analysis will be performed to quantify the potential cost savings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was reviewed by the Institutional Review Board of the Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, which decided that the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act is not applicable. In all participating centres, approval for execution of the FANCY study has been obtained from the local Institutional Review Board before the start of inclusion of patients. The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Guidelines will be revised according to the findings of the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03510923.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of appendiceal carcinoid tumors in children

OBJECTIVE

The study's aim was to review the literature regarding past and current practices in managing incidental appendiceal carcinoid tumors and need for more procedures.

METHOD

A search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases of systematic reviews was undertaken of the English language literature. The mesh terms used were "carcinoid" or "neuroendocrine," "tumour" or "tumor," "appendix," "appendicectomy," or "appendectomy," and "child," "pediatric," or "paediatric." Of the 369 articles found, 37 met the inclusion criteria. Our hospital records and pathology database identified 11 patients with confirmed histological diagnosis of appendicular carcinoids from January 1996 to December 2016. Those cases were also included in this study.

RESULTS

A total of 958 cases were identified from the literature and our own experience. There were 566 females and 343 males giving us a ratio of 1.65:1. The frequency was 0.3% of appendicectomies. There was a 28-fold increase in the risk of having a positive lymph node if the tumor size was >2 cm compared with the risk of having a positive lymph node if the tumor size was ≤2 cm. There was no recurrence or mortality for those with criteria for secondary surgery, who were observed after appendicectomy compared to those that had secondary surgery. Mean follow-up was 58.6 months (4.8 years) with a range of 0-396 months (33 years).

CONCLUSION

Appendicectomy alone is an adequate treatment for an appendicular carcinoid in children irrespective of size, position, lymph node, or mesenteric involvement. Post-appendicectomy investigations were found to be not helpful in this study.

Unexpected findings after surgery for suspected appendicitis rarely change treatment in pediatric patients; Results from a cohort study

BACKGROUND

To determine if non-operative treatment is safe in children with acute appendicitis, we evaluated the incidence of unexpected findings after an appendectomy in children, and the influence they have on subsequent treatment.

METHODS

A historical cohort study (January 2004-December 2014) was performed including children, aged 0-17 years, who underwent an appendectomy for the suspicion of acute appendicitis. Patients were divided based upon histopathological examination. Unexpected findings were reviewed, as well as the subsequent treatment plan.

RESULTS

In total 484 patients were included in this study. In the overall group, unexpected findings were noted in 10 (2.1%) patients of which two patients intra-operatively with a non-inflamed appendix (Ileitis terminalis N=1 and ovarian torsion N=1) and in 8 patients on histopathological examination. The latter group consisted of 4 patients with concomitant simple appendicitis (parasitic infection N=3 and Walthard cell rest N=1), two with concomitant complex appendicitis (carcinoid N=1 and parasitic infection N=1) and two patients with a non-inflamed appendix (endometriosis N=1 and parasitic infection N=1). Treatment was changed in 4 patients (<1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study corroborate the safety of non-operative strategy for acute simple appendicitis, as the occurrence of unexpected findings was low, with extremely few necessary changes of the treatment plan because of serious findings.

TYPE OF STUDY

Prognosis study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2 (retrospective cohort study).

Initial antibiotic treatment for acute simple appendicitis in children is safe: Short-term results from a multicenter, prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Initial antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis has been shown to be safe in adults; so far, not much is known about the safety and efficacy of this treatment in children. The aims of this study were to investigate the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating initial antibiotic treatment for acute appendectomy in children with acute simple appendicitis and to evaluate the safety of this approach.

METHODS

In a multicenter, prospective cohort study patients aged 7-17 years with a radiologically confirmed simple appendicitis were eligible. Intravenous antibiotics (amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 250/25 mg/kg 4 times daily; maximum 6,000/600 mg/d and gentamicin 7 mg/kg once daily) were administered for 48-72 hours. Clinical reevaluation every 6 hours, daily blood samples, and ultrasound follow-up after 48 hours was performed. In case of improvement after 48 hours, oral antibiotics were given for a total of 7 days. At any time, in case of clinical deterioration or non-improvement after 72 hours, an appendectomy could be performed. Follow-up continued until 8 weeks after discharge. Adverse events were defined as major complications of antibiotic treatment, such as allergic reactions, perforated appendicitis, and recurrent appendicitis.

RESULTS

Of 44 eligible patients, 25 participated (inclusion rate, 57%; 95% CI, 42%-70%). Delayed appendectomy was performed in 2, and the other 23 were without symptoms at the 8 weeks follow-up. Minor complications occurred in three patients. None of the patients suffered from an adverse event or a recurrent appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that an RCT comparing initial antibiotic treatment strategy with urgent appendectomy is feasible in children; the intervention seems to be safe.

Histopathological findings in appendectomy specimens: a study of 24,697 cases

PURPOSE

Appendicitis is by far the commonest major emergency general surgical operation. Histopathological examination of the appendix is routinely performed.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of 24,697 appendectomies performed from January 2003 to December 2011. Pathological reports were analyzed for the following parameters: age, gender, and pathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

Appendectomy specimens represent 17 % of all pathological reports. Acute appendicitis was present in 19,637 (79.5 %) patients. The perforation rate was 6.3 % and was significantly higher in adult patients. The negative appendectomy rate was 15 % and was significantly higher in female and adult patients. The incidence of negative appendectomies had clearly decreased over the 9-year period distribution. Incidental unexpected pathological diagnoses were noted in 226 (0.9 %) appendectomy specimens. Neoplastic lesions were present in 171 cases (0.7 %); they include carcinoid, adenocarcinoma, and mucinous neoplasms.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine pathological examination of appendectomy specimens is expensive. With advances in technology and imaging modalities, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis has improved, with a subsequent significant reduction in negative appendectomy. There are still a number of unusual diagnoses found in appendicectomy specimens supporting the continued use of routine histology.

Appendicitis: changing perspectives

Neoplasms are an uncommon finding after appendectomy, with malignant tumors occurring in less than 1% of the surgical specimens, and carcinoid being the most frequent malignancy. A negative or inconclusive ultrasound is not adequate to rule out appendicitis and should be followed by CT scan. For pregnant patients, MRI is a reasonable alternative to CT scan. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics is safe as an initial treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis, with a significant decrease in complications but a high failure rate. Open and laparoscopic appendectomies for appendicitis provide similar results overall, although the laparoscopic technique may be advantageous for obese and elderly patients but may be associated with a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess. Preoperative diagnostic accuracy is of utmost importance during pregnancy because a negative appendectomy is associated with a significant incidence of fetal loss. The increased morbidity associated with appendectomy delay suggests that prompt surgical intervention remains the safest approach. Routine incidental appendectomy should not be performed except in selected cases. Interval appendectomy is not indicated because of considerable risks of complications and lack of any clinical benefit. Patients older than 40 years with an appendiceal mass or abscess treated nonoperatively should routinely have a colonoscopy as part of their follow-up to rule out cancer or alternative diagnosis.