Appendiceal neoplasm risk associated with complicated acute appendicitis-a population based study

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.

Prevalence of, Subtypes of, and the Role of Age in Incidental Appendiceal Neoplasms in Acute Appendicitis: A Single-Institute Study from Bahrain

INTRODUCTION

Primary appendiceal neoplasms (ANs) are rare entities that can present with acute appendicitis symptoms. Accurate diagnosis of these diverse subtypes is crucial for prognosis and proper management.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

 This descriptive retrospective study aims to determine the prevalence and pathological subtypes of incidental ANs in patients presenting with acute appendicitis symptoms at Salmaniya Medical Center (SMC) in Bahrain between the period of January 2020 and March 2024. Particular focus was placed on investigating whether advanced age is a significant risk factor for these neoplasms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 The study included 38,643 patients (aged 15 years and above) who underwent appendectomy for suspected acute appendicitis during the study period. Demographic data, clinical diagnoses, preoperative imaging findings, histopathological reports, and management details were analyzed. Medical records of patients were retrieved from ISEHA system. Statistical analysis was done using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

The results showed that 12 patients (0.04% per year) had different subtypes of appendiceal tumors. Neuroendocrine tumors were the most common, identified in nine patients (75%), including nine cases of well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC). Other histopathological subtypes included low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN), adenocarcinoma, and goblet cell adenocarcinoma, each found in one patient. Additionally, two patients had confirmed appendiceal mucocele. The mean age of patients with ANs was 30 years (range: 19-52 years), and 66.6% were younger than 38 years.  Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of considering ANs in the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis, especially in older patients. Further research is warranted to confirm the role of age as a risk factor and guide clinical decision-making.

Acute Appendicitis in the Elderly: A Nationwide Retrospective Analysis

Background: Acute appendicitis (AA) in older individuals remains understudied. We aimed to assess AA characteristics in patients older than 60 years and evaluate the impact of comorbidities. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed data from the American National Inpatient Sample between 2016 and 2019 to compare AA characteristics in patients younger and older than 60 years. Results: Of the 538,400 patients included, 27.5% were older than 60 years. Younger patients had a higher appendectomy rate (p < 0.01), while the complicated appendicitis rate was higher in older patients. Superficial wound infection, systemic infection, and mortality rates were higher in older patients (p < 0.01). Risk factors for superficial wound infection in patients younger than 60 years included cerebrovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, heart failure, and obesity, whereas only heart failure was a risk factor in older patients. Risk factors for systemic infection in young patients included hypertension, heart failure, obesity, and diabetes mellitus, while in older patients they included hypertension, heart failure, and obesity. Complicated appendicitis was not a risk factor for infections in either group. Conclusions: This study highlights a higher incidence of AA in older individuals than previously reported, with comorbidities posing differing risks for infections between age groups.

Beyond acute appendicitis: a single-institution experience of unexpected pathology findings after 989 consecutive emergency appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

Appendiceal neoplasms (ANs) are rare, with an estimated incidence of around 1%: neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs) comprise most cases. Most tumours are cured by appendectomy alone, although some require right hemicolectomy and intra-operative chemotherapy. The aim of the present study is to evaluate our institution's experience in terms of the prevalence of AN, their histological types, treatment and outcomes in adult patients undergoing emergency appendectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Single-centre retrospective cohort analysis of patients treated for acute appendicitis at a large academic medical centre. Patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) where further compared with patients with acute appendicitis and a histologically confirmed diagnosis of appendiceal neoplasm (AN).

RESULTS

A diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made in 1200 patients. Of these, 989 patients underwent emergency appendectomy. The overall incidence of appendiceal neoplasm was 9.3% (92 patients). AN rate increased with increasing age. Patients under the age of 30 had a 3.8% (14/367 patients) rate of occult neoplasm, whereas patients between 40 and 89 years and older had a 13.0% rate of neoplasm. No difference was found in clinical presentations and type of approach while we found a lower complicated appendicitis rate in the AN group.

CONCLUSION

ANs are less rare with respect to the literature; however, clinically, there are no specific signs of suspicious and simple appendicectomy appears to be curative in most cases. However, age plays an important role; older patients are at higher risk for AN. ANs still challenge the non-operative management concept introduced into the surgical literature.

Risk of appendiceal malignancy in conservatively treated acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Appendectomy has historically been the standard treatment of acute appendicitis, but lately, conservative treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis with antibiotics has successfully been used in selected patients. Complicated acute appendicitis is often treated conservatively initially, but may benefit from interval appendectomy due to the higher risk of appendiceal malignancy and recurrence. Recommendations for follow-up after conservatively treated appendicitis vary. Furthermore, the risk of underlying malignancy and the necessity of routine interval appendectomy are unclear. This study aims to evaluate follow-up status, recurrence, and underlying appendiceal malignancy in conservatively treated uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This study included patients with conservatively treated acute appendicitis at Skåne University Hospital, Sweden during 2012-2019. Information on patient demographics at index admission and data on follow-up, recurrence, number of appendectomies after initial conservative treatment, and underlying malignancy were retrieved from medical charts.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 391 patients, 152 with uncomplicated and 239 with complicated acute appendicitis. Median time of study follow-up was 52 months. The recurrence risk was 23 (15.1%) after uncomplicated and 58 (24.3%) after complicated acute appendicitis (p = 0.030). During follow-up, 55 (23%) patients with complicated acute appendicitis underwent appendectomy. Appendiceal malignancies were found in 12 (5%) patients with previous complicated acute appendicitis versus no appendiceal malignancies after uncomplicated acute appendicitis (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The risk of appendiceal malignancy and recurrent appendicitis was significantly higher in patients with complicated acute appendicitis compared with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

Incidence of occult appendiceal neoplasm in patients over 40 years with acute appendicitis: A single-institution review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence of occult appendiceal neoplasm in patients aged 40 years and over who underwent appendicectomy for appendicitis.

METHODS

The clinical coding electronic database was used to identify patients aged 40 years and over who were diagnosed with appendicitis from September 2010 to September 2022. Patients were included if they were managed operatively.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Modified Monash category 3 (large rural town).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 40 years and over undergoing appendicectomy for appendicitis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence of appendiceal neoplasm within appendicectomy specimen.

RESULTS

A total of 279 patients aged 40 years and over underwent appendicectomy, with a median age of 53 years (range 40-95). Nineteen patients (7%) were found to have a primary neoplastic lesion within the appendix: seven neuroendocrine neoplasms (37%), six sessile serrated lesions (32%), two colonic-type adenocarcinoma (11%), two goblet cell adenocarcinoma (11%) and two appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (11%). Additionally, one patient had a metastatic adenocarcinoma of pancreaticobiliary aetiology.

CONCLUSIONS

Occult appendiceal neoplasm was higher than reported in the literature in our cohort. This would support appendicectomy as the treatment of choice for patients aged 40 years and over with acute appendicitis and caution against nonoperative management in this demographic.

Incidence rate and histology of appendiceal neoplasms in complicated versus uncomplicated appendicitis: A meta-analysis and systematic review

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.

Incidence of appendiceal neoplasms in appendectomy patients

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management has been suggested as a therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis. Notwithstanding, the risk of missing an appendiceal tumor must be considered, being the surgical piece crucial to rule out neoplasms. Therefore, we aim to determine the incidence of appendiceal neoplasms in patients with acute appendicitis, tumor types and the importance of the anatomopathological study of the surgical piece.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study in which we described patients who underwent emergent appendectomy with histopathological findings of appendiceal neoplasms from January 2012 to September 2018. Descriptive analysis included demographic variables, diagnostic methods, and surgical techniques.

RESULTS

2993 patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis who underwent an emergency appendectomy. 64 neoplasms of the appendix were found with an incidence of 2,14%. 67.2% were women, the mean age was 46,4 years (± 19.5). The most frequent appendiceal neoplasms were neuroendocrine tumors (42,2%), followed by appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (35,9%), sessile serrated adenomas (18,8%), and adenocarcinomas (3,1%). In 89,1% of the cases, acute appendicitis was determined by imaging, and 14% of cases were suspected intraoperatively. Appendectomy was performed in 78,1% without additional procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendiceal tumors are rare and must be ruled out in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. The incidence of incidental neoplasms is higher in this study than in the previously reported series. This information must be included in decision-making when considering treatment options for acute appendicitis.

Increased risk of colon cancer after acute appendicitis: a nationwide, population-based study

Background

Acute appendicitis is the most common digestive disease requiring emergency surgery. Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in France. An increased risk of colorectal cancer after acute appendicitis has been suggested. We aimed to assess the frequency of hospitalization for colon cancer after appendicitis in a nationwide analysis.

Methods

Using the French Hospital Discharge Database (PMSI), we included all patients aged 18-59 years presenting with acute appendicitis between 2010 and 2015. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare colon cancer occurrence in these patients vs a control-matched population with a hospital stay for trauma in the same period. Patients presenting strong risk factors for colorectal cancer were excluded.

Findings

A total of 230,349 patients with acute appendicitis (exposed group) were included. We used a propensity score to match each exposed patient with two unexposed patients (controls) to ensure the comparability of the groups, resulting in a control group of 460,698 patients. Univariate analysis found significantly more colon cancer in the appendicitis group, especially during the first year after appendicitis (5 per 10,000 vs 1 per 10,000, p < 0.000, this corresponds to 111 patients in the appendicitis group), namely within the first 6 months. Survival analysis confirmed patients treated for appendicitis present a 4 times higher risk of being diagnosed with colon cancer than control patients during the first year of follow-up (sHR = 4.67 (95% CI: 3.51-6.21), and 8 times higher during the first 6 months (sHR = 8.39; 95% CI: 5.41-12.99). The association was even more marked for right-sided colon cancer (sHR = 8.25; 95% CI: 5.03-13.54 during the 1st year). While the risk of diagnosis of colon cancer was also significant for patients over 40 years, it was even greater in patients under 40 years, who had between a 6-fold and 12-fold increase in risk.

Interpretation

In this population-based study, we found that acute appendicitis seems to be a warning sign for colon cancer (reverse causality) in both middle-aged and younger adults. The risk of presenting with cancer colon was higher during the first six months after acute appendicitis. This raises the issue of routine diagnostic work-up in adults presenting with acute appendicitis.

Funding

Regional Council of Burgundy.

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.

Analysis of appendiceal neoplasms in 1,423 appendectomy specimens: a 10-year retrospective cohort study from a single institution

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to reveal the incidence, clinicopathological, and oncological outcomes of appendiceal neoplasms.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study from a single institution. Patients with a pathological diagnosis of malignancy who underwent appendectomy between January 2011 and 2021 were included in the study, and groups were formed according to pathological type. Clinical, pathological, and oncological results were compared in these groups.

RESULTS

The incidence of neoplasia was 2.38% (n=34) in a cohort of 1,423 appendectomy cases. Of the cases, 56% (n=19) were female. The median age in the entire cohort was 55.5 (range: 13-106) years. In the cohort, the rate of neuroendocrine tumor mucinous cystadenoma adenocarcinoma, and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm, according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer classification of appendiceal neoplasms, was 32.3% (n=11), 26.4% (n=9), 26.4% (n=9), and 14.7% (n=5), respectively. Neuroendocrine tumor patients (median age: 35 years) were younger than the other groups (p=0.021). Secondary complementary surgery was performed in 66.7% (n=6) of adenocarcinoma patients and 27.3% (n=3) of neuroendocrine tumor patients. Right hemicolectomy was performed in all neuroendocrine tumor patients requiring secondary surgery, while right hemicolectomy was performed in three adenocarcinoma patients and cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in three adenocarcinoma patients. After a median follow-up of 44.4 months (95% confidence interval: 18.6-70.1), the mean survival rate was 55% in appendiceal adenocarcinoma patients compared to 100% in neuroendocrine tumor patients.

CONCLUSION

Appendiceal neoplasms are rare but remain an important cause of mortality. Appendiceal adenocarcinomas are associated with poorer oncological outcomes compared to other neoplasms.

Discussion on the benefits of different treatment strategies in elderly and non-elderly patients with appendix MiNEN: a retrospective study based on SEER database

PURPOSE

To investigate the benefits of surgery alone and postoperative chemotherapy in elderly and non-elderly patients with appendiceal mixed neuroendocrine non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) and analyze the factors affecting the prognosis of patients with MiNEN of the appendix.

METHODS

Based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER) of the National Cancer Institute of the USA, 389 patients with appendiceal MiNENs from 2000 to 2016 were collected. All patients were distributed in the elderly group (≥ 60 years old) and the non-elderly group (< 60 years old) according to their age. The prognosis of the two groups of patients who received simple surgery and postoperative chemotherapy was analyzed and compared. The two treatment methods of the two tranches were matched by propensity score matching method. The effect of different treatment ways on the prognosis of sick persons was compared. The survivorship curves were painted by the Kaplan Meier method, log rank test was used to analyze the subsistence discrepancy of each group, and COX proportional risk model was used to analyze the factors affecting the prognosis of patients with appendiceal MiNENs.

RESULTS

No matter the overall survival rate (OS) or cancer-specific mortality (CSM) of the two treatment schemes, the prognosis of patients in the only surgery group was meaningfully higher than that in the postoperative chemotherapy group, with statistically significant difference in component comparison (χ² = 16.496, χ² = 16.860, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching of patients in each group, there was no striking discrepancy in the OS of patients in the only surgery group compared with those in the postoperative chemotherapy group, regardless of whether they were elderly patients or non-elderly patients (χ² = 3.205, χ² = 1.521, all P > 0.05), the CSM consequences are fitting in with the OS. The consequences of the multivariate COX regression model showed that age (≥ 60 years old), sex (female), high histological grade, and lymph node positive were all the influencing factors for the poor OS of patients with MiNEN; the CSM results are consistent with the OS.

CONCLUSION

For patients with appendix MiNEN, whether elderly or non-elderly patients (especially for non-elderly patients), surgical treatment may be a better choice.

Comparison of the risk of appendiceal tumors in uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Interval appendectomy or non-operative management is commonly performed for complicated appendicitis in adult patients. However, these treatments are still controversial because the incidence rate of appendiceal tumors recognized after interval appendectomy is reportedly higher than that after emergency appendectomy. Thus, this study aimed to compare the appendiceal tumor rates between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of patients with appendicitis who underwent surgical removal at a single institution over 7.5 years. The primary objective was the comparison of the incidence rate of appendiceal tumors using propensity score matching, and the secondary objective was the same comparison among older patients, defined as patients aged ≥ 60 years.

RESULTS

A total of 1277 patients were included. Of these patients, 297 (23.3%) were preoperatively diagnosed with complicated appendicitis. Moreover, 22 (1.7%) patients, including 14 cases of complicated appendicitis and 8 cases of uncomplicated appendicitis, were diagnosed with appendiceal tumors based on pathological examination. No significant difference was found in the incidence rate of appendiceal tumors between the two groups after matching for patients' background, including age, sex, and history of appendicitis by propensity score matching (P = 0.073). However, among patients aged ≥ 60 years, the incidence of appendiceal tumors was significantly higher in complicated than in uncomplicated appendicitis (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the overall risk of appendiceal tumors did not differ between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis when analyzed by the propensity score matching, in older patients aged ≥ 60 years, the risk increased among those with complicated appendicitis. Therefore, although the incidence is low, complicated appendicitis, particularly, among older patients, should be examined carefully and be performed IA when unusual findings exist.

Caveat emptor: The accuracy of claims data in appendicitis research

BACKGROUND

International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes are used to identify patients with appendicitis and classify severity of disease for research and hospital reimbursement. We sought to determine accuracy of International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes in classifying appendicitis as uncomplicated versus complicated (defined as perforated, necrotic, or abscess) compared with the clinical gold standard: surgeon characterization of the appendix in the operative report.

METHODS

Retrospective review of operative reports and discharge International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes for patients ≥18 years old who underwent noninterval, nonincidental appendectomy between January 2012 and December 2019 at a tertiary referral center. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were calculated for International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes to classify appendicitis accurately as complicated compared with surgeon description. ICD-9/10 codes and surgeon description were categorized into complicated/uncomplicated based on the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grading system.

RESULTS

In the study, 1,495 patients with acute appendicitis underwent appendectomy. Per surgeon description, 200 (13%) were complicated and 1,295 (87%) uncomplicated. Compared with surgeon description, discharge International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes did not accurately identify complicated appendicitis: sensitivity = 0.68, positive predictive value = 0.77. As a sensitivity analysis, the cohort was stratified by public versus private payers, and the results did not change.

CONCLUSION

International Classification of Disease, ninth/tenth revision codes do not accurately identify surgeon-described complicated appendicitis. Nearly one-third of the cases of complicated appendicitis were coded as uncomplicated. Such misclassification negatively impacts reimbursement for complicated appendicitis care and could lead to misleading results in research and quality improvement activities that rely on these codes.

Appendectomy versus nonoperative management of simple appendicitis: A post hoc analysis of an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter study using a hierarchical ordinal scale

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists about the preferred initial treatment of appendicitis. We sought to compare the two treatments for initial management of simple appendicitis.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis of the Multicenter Study for the Treatment of Appendicitis in America: Acute, Perforated, and Gangrenous database, subjects were divided into appendectomy or nonoperative management (NOM; antibiotics only or percutaneous drainage) cohorts. A novel topic-specific hierarchical ordinal scale was created with eight mutually exclusive categories: mortality, reoperation, other secondary interventions, readmission, emergency department visit, wound complication, surgical site infection, and no complication. Pairwise comparisons of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Imaging Severity Grade 1 (simple appendicitis) patients were compared using win-lose-tie scoring and the sums of appendectomy/NOM groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total 3,591 subjects were included: 3,262 appendectomy and 329 NOM, with significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups. Across 28 sites, the rate of NOM ranged from 0% to 48%, and the loss to follow-up rate was significantly higher for NOM compared with appendectomy (16.5% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.024). In the simple appendicitis hierarchical ordinal scale analysis, 2,319 subjects resulted in 8,714,304 pairwise comparisons; 75% of comparisons resulted in ties. The median (interquartile range) sums for the two groups are as follows: surgical, 400 (400-400), and NOM, 400 (-2,427 to 400) (p < 0.001). A larger proportion of appendectomy subjects (88.1%) had an outcome that was equivalent (or better) than at least half of the subjects compared with NOM subjects (NOM, 70.5%; OR [95% confidence interval], 0.3 [0.2-0.4]).

CONCLUSION

In contemporary American practice, appendectomy (compared with NOM) for simple appendicitis is associated with lower odds of developing clinically important unfavorable outcomes in the first year after illness.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

The association between appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal neoplasm histology-a population-based study

PURPOSE

Recent studies have reported alarming appendiceal tumor rates associated with complicated acute appendicitis, especially in patients presenting with a periappendicular abscess. However, the data on histology of appendiceal tumors among acute appendicitis patients is limited, especially in patient cohorts differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. We have previously reported the association of increased appendiceal tumor prevalence with complicated acute appendicitis in this population-based study. The objective of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the association of both appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal tumor histology.

METHODS

This nationwide population-based registry study (The Finnish Cancer Registry) was conducted from 2007 to 2013. All appendiceal tumors (n = 840) and available medical reports (n = 504) of these patients at eight study hospitals were previously evaluated, identifying altogether 250 patients with both acute appendicitis and appendiceal tumor.

RESULTS

The severity of acute appendicitis was significantly associated with more malignant tumor histology. The risk of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly higher among patients with periappendicular abscess (OR 15.05, CI 95% 6.98-32.49, p < 0.001) and patients presenting with perforated acute appendicitis (OR 4.09, CI 95% 1.69-9.90, p = 0.0018) compared to patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Similarly, patient age over 40 years was significantly associated with the risk of adenocarcinoma and pseudomyxoma (OR 26.46, Cl 95% 7.95-88.09, p < 0.001). Patient sex was not associated with a more malignant appendiceal tumor histology (p = 0.67).

CONCLUSION

More malignant appendiceal tumor histology of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly associated with patient age over 40 years and complicated acute appendicitis, especially periappendicular abscess.

Acute Appendicitis in the Elderly: A Literature Review on an Increasingly Frequent Surgical Problem

With increased life expectancy and the growing total population of elderly patients, there has been rise in the number of cases of acute appendicitis in elderly people. Although acute appendicitis is not the most typical pathological condition in the elderly, it is not uncommon. Most of these patients require surgical treatment, and as with any acute surgical pathology in advanced age, treatment possibilities are affected by comorbidities, overall health status, and an increased risk of complications. In this literature review we discuss differences in acute appendicitis in the elderly population, with a focus on clinical signs, diagnostics, pathogenesis, treatment, and results.

Appendiceal adenocarcinoma found by surgery for acute appendicitis is associated with older age

Background

Appendectomy for acute appendicitis is the most common procedure performed emergently by general surgeons in the United States. The current management of acute appendicitis is increasingly controversial as non-operative management gains favor. Although rare, appendiceal neoplasms are often found as an incidental finding in the setting of appendectomy. Criteria and screening for appendiceal neoplasms are not standardized among surgical societies.

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all patients who underwent appendectomy over a 9-year period (2010–2018). Over the same time period, patients who underwent appendectomy in two municipal hospitals in The Bronx, New York City, USA were reviewed.

Results

We found a 1.7% incidence of appendiceal neoplasms locally and a 0.53% incidence of appendiceal tumors in a national population sample. Both groups demonstrated an increased incidence of appendiceal carcinoma by age. This finding was most pronounced after the age of 40 in both local and national populations. In our study, the incidence of appendiceal tumors increased with each decade interval up to the age of 80 and peaked at 2.1% in patients between 70 and 79 years.

Conclusions

Appendiceal adenocarcinomas were identified in patients with acute appendicitis that seem to be associated with increasing age. The presence of an appendiceal malignancy should be considered in the management of older patients with acute appendicitis before a decision to embark on non-operative therapy.

Appendicitis with submucosal fecalith mimicking a submucosal tumor: a case report

Background

Submucosal fecalith(s) mimicking submucosal tumors of the gastrointestinal lumen are rare. Moreover, accurate preoperative diagnosis of these entities is exceedingly difficult, and the mechanism(s) of their formation remains unclear.

Case presentation

A 40-year-old woman visited the authors’ hospital due to lower abdominal pain and diarrhea. She had previously been treated for endometriosis. Laboratory investigation revealed increased C-reactive protein levels. Abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed thickening of the appendix wall and dilation of the small intestine. The patient was diagnosed with paralytic ileus caused by appendicitis, and interval appendectomy was scheduled. She underwent laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy after conservative treatment. Partial cecal resection was selected due to the presence of an elastic mass in the cecum. The final pathological diagnosis was submucosal fecalith, not submucosal tumor. On day 5, the patient was discharged without any postoperative complications.

Conclusions

In cases of appendicitis with fecalith(s) that appear as submucosal tumor(s) on colonoscopy, submucosal fecalith mimicking submucosal tumor should be considered in the differential diagnosis.

Risk of appendiceal neoplasm after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management is often the treatment of choice in cases of complicated appendicitis and routine interval appendectomy is not usually recommended. Actually, recent studies show an alarming number of appendiceal neoplasms following interval appendectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of appendiceal neoplasms and their histological types after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in adults.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Studies reporting appendiceal neoplasm rates after interval appendectomy and histopathological characteristics were included. The most recent World Health Organization (WHO) classification of malignant tumours was considered. A pooled prevalence analysis for both prevalence and pathology was performed.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies was included: seven retrospective series and one randomized controlled trial. The pooled prevalence of neoplasms after interval appendectomy was 11% (95% CI 7-15; I² = 37.5%, p = 0.13). Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms occurred in 43% (95% CI 19-68), adenocarcinoma in 29% (95% CI 6-51), appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm in 21% (95% CI 6-36), globet cell carcinoma in 13% (95% CI -2-28), adenoma or serrated lesions in 20% (95% CI -0-41) of cases.

CONCLUSION

The risk of appendiceal neoplasm in patients treated with interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is 11%; mucinous neoplasm is the most common histopathological type. Further studies should investigate this association in order to clarify the biological pathway and clinical implications.

Appendiceal neoplasm incidence and mortality rates are on the rise in Australia

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to examine the incidence and mortality rates of appendiceal neoplasms (ANs) in Australia.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on national data obtained from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) from 1982 to 2013. Changes to the incidence, and the cancer-specific mortality following the diagnosis of ANs were analyzed over this time period, with stratification performed for histological subtype, gender, and age groups (<50y and ≥50y).

RESULTS

Incidence and mortality rates of ANs increased significantly across both genders and age groups. Incidence rates increased by 415%, from 0.40/100 000 population in 1982 to 2.06/100 000 in 2013. Overall mortality rates increased by 130%, from 0.057/100 000 during 1982-1985 to 0.131/100 000 during 2010-2013. Controlling for age group and gender, the incidence rates increased by 20% every four years (Incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17, 1.23, global P value<0.0001), and controlling for age, the mortality rates increased by 8% every four years (IRR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.17, global P-value = 0.0401).

CONCLUSION

The increasing use of CT scanning, improvements in pathological assessment of the appendix, and the growing aging population may have contributed in part to the apparent rise in the incidence of ANs.

Retrospective case-control study to predict a potential underlying appendiceal tumor in an acute appendicitis context based on a CT-scoring system

OBJECTIVES

To assess CT signs to discriminate an appendiceal tumor versus a non-tumoral appendix in an acute appendicitis context.

METHODS

A 10-year bicentric retrospective case-control study was performed in adults. Patients with a histopathological appendiceal tumor and appendicitis were paired for age and sex with patients with non-tumorous appendicitis (1/3 ratio, respectively). Two senior radiologists blindly analyzed numerous CT findings with final consensus to perform univariate and multivariate statistical analyses. A diagnostic CT scan score was calculated with a bootstrap internal validation. Reproducibility was assessed based on the kappa statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 208 patients (51 +/- 21 years; 114 males) were included (52 patients in the tumor group and 156 in the non-tumor group). In the multivariate analysis, an appendicolith and fat stranding were protective factors with OR = 0.2 (p = 0.01) and OR = 0.3 (p = 0.02), respectively, while mural calcifications (OR = 47, p = 0.0001), an appendix mass (OR = 7.1, p = 0.008), a focal asymmetric wall abnormality (OR = 4.9, p = 0, 001), or a ≥ 15 mm diameter (OR = 3.5, p = 0.009) were positive predictive factors of an underlying tumor. Using a ≥1 cut-off, our diagnostic score had an AUC = 0.87 (95 % CI, 0.82-0.93) and a positive likelihood ratio = 13.5 (95 % CI, 6.7-27.1).

CONCLUSION

We developed a reliable scoring system based on CT findings, which is highly predictive of an underlying appendiceal neoplasm in an appendicitis context using a ≥1 cut-off.

Quality analysis of operative reports and referral data for appendiceal neoplasms with peritoneal dissemination

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis from appendiceal neoplasms is a rare disease usually found unexpectedly and is associated with deficits in quality reporting of findings.

METHODS

Retrospective review of our appendiceal peritoneal metastases carcinomatosis database evaluating quality of index operative and pathology reports. Operative report quality was graded by 2 standards; general quality, based on Royal College of Surgeons quality metrics and peritoneal metastases assessment. Pathology report quality was assessed by the accuracy of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventy-five index operative reports and 490 outside pathology reports were reviewed. General quality of the index operative reports was excellent, with nearly 80% of reports encompassing all the Royal College of Surgeons quality metrics. Peritoneal metastases assessment was poor. Forty-four percent of the reports performed no peritoneal evaluation, while 48.3% only involved partial peritoneal evaluation. Only 7.7% of the reports performed a complete evaluation. Of the pathology reports, 48.4% had discrepancies with final pathologic findings. Low-grade disease and high-grade disease were misdiagnosed 36.06% and 62.7% of the time, respectively. Discordant treatment occurred in 15.3% and 30.0% of cases for misdiagnosed low-grade and high-grade disease, respectively. Incomplete cytoreduction was attempted in nearly a third of referral cases, which was associated with a significantly increased risk for ultimate incomplete cytoreduction with an odds ratio of 4.72.

CONCLUSION

This review finds that referral operative reports' descriptions of the technical aspects of a procedure is usually complete. However, oncologic parameters and descriptions of peritoneal metastases are frequently incomplete. Further, pathology reports from outside institutions can lead to inappropriate clinical management decisions. We propose a simplified algorithm to assist nonperitoneal surface malignancy surgeons.

National trends in the presentation of surgically resected appendiceal adenocarcinoma over a decade

BACKGROUND

Rates of nonoperative management of acute appendicitis and appendiceal adenocarcinoma have increased over a decade, but the presentation and outcomes of appendiceal adenocarcinoma over this period is not well-characterized.

METHODS

Patients with surgically resected Stage I-III appendiceal adenocarcinoma were identified from the 2006 to 2015 National Cancer Data Base and classified into two cohorts, 2006-2010 and 2011-2015, based on year of diagnosis. Three-year overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates.

RESULTS

Of 4233 patients, 1369 (32.3%) and 2864 (67.7%) were diagnosed in 2006-2010 and 2011-2015, respectively. Following multivariable analysis, patients in 2011-2015 were more likely to be <40 years of age (6.4% vs. 4.7%, odds ratio [OR] 1.53, p .015), present with pT4 tumors (40.2% vs. 34.4%, OR 1.46, p .004), and undergo hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (4.4% vs. 2.4%, OR 1.97, p .001). Comparing patients diagnosed in 2011-2015 to 2006-2010, adjusted 3-year OS was no different among all patients (81.1% vs. 79%, p .778).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been an increase in the proportion of patients with pT4 appendix tumors over time, primarily among older (≥60 years) patients. Even so, these shifts in presentation have not resulted in differences in survival outcomes.

Appendicular neoplasms and consequences in patients undergoing surgery for suspected acute appendicitis

INTRODUCTION

In patients treated with an appendectomy for acute appendicitis, the specimen is generally sent for histological evaluation. In an era of increasing non-operative treatment for acute appendicitis, it is important to know the incidence, the diagnostic accuracy, and treatment consequences of appendicular neoplasms that are found in acute appendicitis. We hypothesize that pre- and intra-operative parameters might predict an appendicular neoplasm.

METHODS

Data was used from our previous prospective observational cohort study. All patients undergoing surgery for suspected acute appendicitis were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of appendicular neoplasms in patients operated for acute appendicitis. Secondary outcomes were pre-operative diagnostics and imaging outcomes, intra-operative surgical judgment, and postoperative management and outcome. Possible predictors of an appendicular neoplasm were identified and used in multivariable logistic regression. Patients with an appendicular neoplasm were followed for 3 years after initial appendectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 1975 patients underwent surgery for suspected acute appendicitis and in 98.3% (1941/1975) the appendix was removed. In 1.5% (30/1941) of these patients, an appendicular neoplasm was found. Among the malignant neoplasms, the majority were grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors (NET) in 65% (13/20). On pre-operative imaging, there was no suspicion of malignancy. In three cases, there was an intra-operative suspicion of malignancy. Multivariable analysis showed only age as an independent predictor for appendicular neoplasms. No recurrent or new malignancy was found during follow-up.

DISCUSSION

The incidence of appendicular neoplasm in patients undergoing an acute appendectomy is very low and clinical risk factors could not be identified.

Preoperative computed tomography is poor in detecting tumors of the appendix among patients with acute appendicitis: A cohort study of 5,224 appendectomies

BACKGROUND

Neoplastic processes are among the known etiologies for acute appendicitis. While conservative treatment with antibiotics alone has been proposed as a treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, the presence of tumors should be excluded when offering patients this option. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) in detecting appendiceal tumors.

METHOD

Consecutive patients operated on for acute appendicitis between January 2007 and October 3, 2018, in our university hospital were included. Whenever appendiceal tumor was histopathologically confirmed, CT interpretations and surgical reports were carefully reviewed. All CT scans were reanalyzed by consultant body radiologists. Discrepancies between the preliminary and final radiological interpretations were noted.

RESULTS

A total of 5,224 patients underwent appendectomy, of whom 4,766 had histopathologically confirmed acute appendicitis. Eighty-four patients (median, 61 (13-89) years; 54% female) were diagnosed with appendiceal tumor. Fifty-two patients (62%) had uncomplicated appendicitis. Although incidence of tumors was associated with older age, tumors were found in all ages. The share of tumors increased from 1.7% to 3.0%/year during the study. The most common tumors were neuroendocrine tumors (n = 33), low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (n = 14), and adenocarcinomas (n = 11). Sixty-one patients (73%) underwent preoperative CT. Computed tomography interpretation during on-call hours suspected tumor in only one case (3.4%) with invasive tumor, and in five cases (16%) with noninvasive tumor.

CONCLUSION

Appendiceal tumors are possible findings in appendix specimens, and most patients had uncomplicated acute appendicitis. In light of findings we conclude that CT cannot be used to exclude neoplastic etiology underlying acute appendicitis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic, level IV.

Adenocarcinoma of Stump Appendicitis: An Extremely Rare Pathology - A Literature Review

Emergency appendectomy for acute appendicitis is the most common emergency surgical procedure performed all over the world. While amputating the appendix from the cecum, a small (usually less than 5 mm) stump is left behind. Below this, the suture or stapler is applied to secure the base of the appendix, which is now known as a stump. Stump appendicitis, the inflammation of appendiceal remnant after an appendectomy, is a rare phenomenon. Additionally, the incidence of adenocarcinoma in the stump of the appendix is also extremely rare and can present with the symptoms of appendicitis. Adenocarcinoma in stump appendectomy patients can present from 5-43 years after the index appendectomy surgery. The majority of patients present with symptoms similar to that of appendicitis, with right lower quadrant abdominal pain, usually diagnosed via CT scans, after which they undergo stump appendectomy. The diagnosis of adenocarcinoma is only made on the histopathology report. We engaged in a review of the relevant literature published in the English language for the last 100 years. This was conducted by reviewing Google Scholar, PubMed, and MEDLINE® databases, as well as references to all related articles. There are only six cases reported in the literature, which shows the rarity of this condition. Regarding the appropriate treatment for this rare entity, multi-disciplinary team discussions should be carried out for optimum management of the individual patients. Right hemicolectomy is the recommended procedure for all patients, and prognosis depends on the staging of the disease.

Increased risk of malignancy for patients older than 40 years with appendicitis and an appendix wider than 10 mm on computed tomography scan: A post hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of underlying malignancy in appendicitis ranges between 0.5% and 1.7%. We sought to identify the subset of patients with appendicitis who are at increased risk of appendiceal malignancy.

METHODS

Using the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Study of the Treatment of Appendicitis in America: Acute, Perforated, and Gangrenous database, we included all patients from 28 centers undergoing immediate, delayed, or interval appendectomy between 2017 and 2018. Univariate then multivariable analyses were performed to compare patients with and without malignancy and to identify independent demographic, clinical, laboratory, and/or radiological predictors of malignancy. Akaike information criteria for regression models were used to evaluate goodness of fit.

RESULTS

A total of 3,293 patients were included. The median age was 38 (27-53) years, and 46.5% were female patients. On pathology, 48 (1.5%) had an underlying malignancy (adenocarcinoma [60.4%], neuroendocrine [37.5%], and lymphoma [2.1%]). Patients with malignancy were older (56 [34.5-67] vs 37 [27-52] years, P < .001), had longer duration of symptoms before presentation (36-41 vs 18-23 hours, P = .03), and were more likely to have a phlegmon on imaging (6.3% vs 1.3%, P = .03). Multivariable analyses showed that an enlarged appendiceal diameter was independently associated with malignancy (odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.12; P = .01). The incidence of malignancy in patients >40 years with an appendiceal diameter >10 mm on computed tomography was 2.95% compared with 0.97% in patients ≤40 years old with appendiceal diameter ≤10 mm. The corresponding risk ratio for that population was 3.03 (95% confidence interval: 1.24-7.42; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The combination of age >40 and an appendiceal diameter >10 mm is associated with a greater than 3-fold increased risk of malignancy in patients presenting with appendicitis.

Interval laparoscopic appendectomy after antibiotic therapy for appendiceal abscess in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of interval laparoscopic appendectomy after antibiotic therapy in elderly patients with appendiceal abscess.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data for 50 patients with appendiceal abscess aged ≥18 years who had initially planned to undergo interval laparoscopic appendectomy after antibiotic therapy and 50 patients with appendicitis aged ≥70 years who had undergone early laparoscopic appendectomy. All patients were treated at the National Hospital Organization Kumamoto Medical Center between 2012 and 2018. We compared perioperative outcomes after interval appendectomy between patients aged <70 years and ≥70 years.

RESULTS

Clinical progression of appendicitis during antibiotic therapy developed in one patient (2.0%), and recurrent appendicitis after antibiotic therapy for appendiceal abscess occurred in two patients (4.0%). Pathological findings confirmed appendiceal neoplasms in four patients (8.0%). Postoperative infectious complications occurred in 1 of 47 patients (2.1%) who had undergone successful interval laparoscopic appendectomy, and the median length of postoperative hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range, 3-5 days). There were no significant differences in outcomes after interval appendectomy between patients aged <70 years and ≥70 years. In the secondary analysis, the median length of postoperative hospital stay after interval laparoscopic appendectomy for appendiceal abscess (4 days) was significantly shorter than that after early laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis (7 days; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Interval laparoscopic appendectomy for appendiceal abscess may be safe and effective in elderly patients without severe comorbidities. Interval appendectomy may be necessary for determining the underlying cause of appendiceal abscess in adults.

[Antibiotics alone as an alternative to appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults: Changes in treatment modalities related to the COVID-19 health crisis]

La saturation intrahospitalière liée à l’arrivée massive de patients atteints du COVID-19 nécessitant une prise en charge urgente conduit à reconsidérer la prise en charge des autres patients. Différer au maximum les hospitalisations et les opérations chirurgicales non urgentes est un des objectifs des chirurgiens afin de désengorger autant que possible le système de soins. Alors que la majorité des opérations programmées sont annulées, la réduction de la chirurgie d’urgence est évidemment compliquée à proposer sans altérer la qualité de la prise en charge et conduire à une perte de chance pour le patient. Cependant, l’appendicite aiguë constitue une situation spécifique bien particulière et la fréquence de cette pathologie conduit à considérer ce cas particulier. En effet, tandis que le traitement recommandé de l’appendicite aiguë non compliquée est chirurgical, l’alternative non chirurgicale par antibiothérapie seule a été largement évaluée dans la littérature au cours de travaux de qualité. Dans la mesure où la limite principale du traitement médical exclusif de l’appendicite aiguë non compliquée est le risque de récidive à distance, cette option thérapeutique représente une alternative de choix pour réduire la surcharge intrahospitalière dans ce contexte de crise sanitaire. L’objectif de ce travail est donc de mettre à disposition des médecins et des chirurgiens un guide pratique issu d’une analyse de la littérature sur le traitement médical de l’appendicite aiguë non compliquée de l’adulte afin de pouvoir proposer ce traitement alternatif aux bons patients et dans des bonnes conditions, notamment lorsque l’accès au bloc opératoire est impossible.

Antibiotics alone as an alternative to appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults: Changes in treatment modalities related to the COVID-19 health crisis

The massive inflow of patients with COVID-19 requiring urgent care has overloaded hospitals in France and impacts the management of other patients. Deferring hospitalization and non-urgent surgeries has become a priority for surgeons today in order to relieve the health care system. It is obviously not simple to reduce emergency surgery without altering the quality of care or leading to a loss of chance for the patient. Acute appendicitis is a very specific situation and the prevalence of this disease leads us to reconsider this particular disease in the context of the COVID-19 crisis. Indeed, while the currently recommended treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis is surgical appendectomy, the non-surgical alternative of medical management by antibiotic therapy alone has been widely evaluated by high-quality studies in the literature. Insofar as the main limitation of exclusively medical treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is the risk of recurrent appendicitis, this treatment option represents an alternative of choice to reduce the intra-hospital overload in this context of health crisis. The aim of this work is therefore to provide physicians and surgeons with a practical guide based on a review of the literature on the medical treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults, to offer this alternative treatment to the right patients and under good conditions, especially when access to the operating room is limited or impossible.

Risk factors for appendiceal neoplasm and malignancy among patients with acute appendicitis

PURPOSE

Non-operative management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis has shown promising results but might carry the risk of delayed diagnosis of premalignant or malignant appendiceal tumors found by chance in 0.7-2.5% of appendiceal specimen after appendectomy. Purpose of this study was to analyze whether appendiceal tumors are associated with a complicated appendicitis and to determine risk factors for appendiceal neoplasm and malignancy in patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 1033 adult patients, who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis from 2010 to 2016 at the University hospital Erlangen. Data included patients' demographics; comorbidities; pre-, intra- and postoperative findings; and histopathological results. Complicated appendicitis was defined in the presence of perforation or abscess.

RESULTS

Appendiceal neoplasm respectively malignancy rate was 2.8% respectively 1.5%. Using univariate analysis, we identified seven risk factors at least for appendiceal neoplasm or malignancy: age, ASA, C-reactive protein, appendiceal diameter, perforation, intraoperative perithyphilitic abscess, and complicated appendicitis. Risk for appendiceal neoplasm or malignancy was 4.4% respectively 2.7% in complicated acute appendicitis compared to 2.0% respectively 1.0% in uncomplicated appendicitis (p = 0.043 respectively p = 0.060). In multivariate analysis, age ≥ 50 years and a diameter of the appendix in the sonography ≥ 13 mm were independent risk factors predicting the presence of appendiceal neoplasm and malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with appendicitis, there are relevant risk factors predicting appendiceal tumors, especially age and appendiceal diameter in sonography. But the identified risk factors have a low sensitivity and specificity, so obtaining a confident preoperative diagnosis is challenging.

Feasibility, acceptance, safety, and effectiveness of antibiotic therapy as alternative treatment approach to appendectomy in uncomplicated acute appendicitis

PURPOSE

Based on results from randomized controlled trials, there is an increasing discussion if antibiotic treatment is an equivalent therapeutic approach to appendectomy in uncomplicated acute appendicitis. This observational prospective study evaluates its feasibility, safety, and effectiveness in clinical practice.

METHODS

The study included all consecutive adults treated for acute appendicitis over an 18-month period in one hospital. Patients receiving antibiotics were compared to those treated surgically. Follow-up comprised 1 year. The primary endpoint was treatment success, defined as no secondary appendectomy during follow-up (antibiotic group) or successful appendectomy (primary surgical group). Secondary endpoints were complications, duration of hospital stay, pain intensity, and length of absence from work.

RESULTS

54/124 (43.6%) patients were primarily treated with antibiotics and 70/124 (56.4%) surgically. Treatment success at 1 year was 77.1% (95%-CI 62.8-88%) for antibiotic and 100% for surgical treatment. Complications were non-significantly less frequent both among all patients treated with antibiotics and among patients undergoing secondary appendectomy compared to patients undergoing primary appendectomy (20.8% vs. 27.1% and 9.1% vs. 27.1%). The initial hospital stay was significantly shorter in the antibiotic group (mean 3.6 vs. 4.8 days, median 3 days, p = 0.03). After 1 year, the cumulative hospital stay was not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendectomy remains the most effective treatment for the definitive cure of acute appendicitis. However, antibiotic therapy can be a safe alternative approach for selected patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00010401.

Antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Appendectomy has been the gold standard for every form of appendicitis. In recent years, though, it has repeatedly been claimed that for acute uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic therapy can be an equivalent treatment. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine if antibiotic therapy is a safe and effective alternative to appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

METHODS

In a systematic literature review, relevant databases were searched for randomized studies comparing appendectomy with antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. The primary endpoint was the successful treatment of appendicitis. Secondary endpoints were pain intensity, duration of hospitalization, absence from work, and the incidence of complications.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled studies (n = 1430 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of the 727 patients treated initially with antibiotics, 272 (37.4%) underwent secondary appendectomy within 1 year (treatment effectiveness: 62.6% compared to 96.3% in the surgical group, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.76, p < 0.00001). Neither duration of hospital stay (MD 0.11 days, 95% CI: - 0.22-0.43, p = 0.53) nor the probability of complication-free treatment (RR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.97-1.22, p = 0.16) were significantly different between the two treatments. Absence from work was significantly shorter in the antibiotic group (MD - 2.49 days, 95% CI: - 4.59-- 0.40, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis shows that appendectomy is more effective than antibiotic therapy for definitive cure of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. However, since the incidence of complications does not differ between the two treatments, antibiotic therapy might be a reasonable alternative for selected patients.