2
|
Henriksen SR, Christophersen C, Rosenberg J, Fonnes S. Varying negative appendectomy rates after laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:205. [PMID: 37219616 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-02935-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdominal pain, and treatment with laparoscopy has become increasingly common during the past two decades. Guidelines recommend that normal appendices are removed if operated for suspected acute appendicitis. It is unclear how many patients are affected by this recommendation. The aim of this study was to estimate the rate of negative appendectomies in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected acute appendicitis. METHODS This study was reported following the PRISMA 2020 statement. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase for retrospective or prospective cohort studies (with n ≥ 100) including patients with suspected acute appendicitis. The primary outcome was the histopathologically confirmed negative appendectomy rate after a laparoscopic approach with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed subgroup analyses on geographical region, age, sex, and use of preoperative imaging or scoring systems. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS In total, 74 studies were identified, summing up to 76,688 patients. The negative appendectomy rate varied from 0% to 46% in the included studies (interquartile range 4-20%). The meta-analysis estimated the negative appendectomy rate to be 13% (95% CI 12-14%) with large variations between the individual studies. Sensitivity analyses did not change the estimate. The certainty of evidence by GRADE was moderate due to inconsistency in point estimates. CONCLUSION The overall estimated negative appendectomy rate after laparoscopic surgery was 13% with moderate certainty of evidence. The negative appendectomy rate varied greatly between studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siri R Henriksen
- Centre for Perioperative Optimisation, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 1, DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark.
| | - Camilla Christophersen
- Centre for Perioperative Optimisation, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 1, DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Jacob Rosenberg
- Centre for Perioperative Optimisation, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 1, DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Siv Fonnes
- Centre for Perioperative Optimisation, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 1, DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lee S, Connelly TM, Ryan JM, Power-Foley M, Neary PM. Outcomes of the Macroscopically Normal Appendix Left in Situ in Patients with Suspected Appendicitis. World J Surg 2022; 46:1353-1358. [PMID: 35274182 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06497-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/30/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Right iliac fossa (RIF) pain is a common indication for laparoscopy to diagnose and treat appendicitis. When a macroscopically normal appendix is found, there is no standard consensus regarding excision. Some surgeons remove the appendix due to the risk of microscopic inflammation and to avoid a future, repeat laparoscopy for possible appendicitis. Alternatively, others leave the appendix in situ to avoid morbidity from a potentially unnecessary procedure. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with macroscopically normal appendices left in situ. METHODS All emergency laparoscopies without appendicectomy between January 1st 2010- December 31st 2020 were identified from theatre records. All operative notes were individually evaluated and comments on the macroscopic appearance of the appendix and any intra-operative pathology were recorded. Only patients undergoing laparoscopy for suspected appendicitis with macroscopically normal appendices were included. RESULTS A total of 120 patients [median age 21.68 (range 9-90.8) years] were included. The cohort was predominantly female (n=105, 87.5%). Forty-eight patients (40.0%) had a positive finding during index laparoscopy. During a median duration of 94.5 (range 8-131) months' follow-up, 16 patients (13.33%) underwent a repeat laparoscopy for recurrent RIF pain. Thirteen (10.8% of total cohort) subsequently underwent an appendicectomy. Histology confirmed acute appendicitis in six cases (4.17% of entire cohort). On subanalysis of smaller cohort, index laparoscopies with no positive findings (n=72), nine patients (12.5%) underwent appendicectomy with two (2.7%) appendices demonstrating appendicitis on histological examination. CONCLUSION 87% of the total cohort with a normal appendix at laparoscopy for RIF pain did not undergo further laparoscopy. Less than 5% of the total cohort and 2.7% of subanalysis cohort had an appendicectomy for histologically-proven appendicitis within the follow-up period. From the evidence in this study, we conclude that leaving the appendix in situ unless macroscopically inflamed is a viable alternative to excision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Lee
- Department of Academic Surgery, University Hospital Waterford, University College Cork, Dunmore Road, Waterford, Ireland.
| | - Tara M Connelly
- Department of Academic Surgery, University Hospital Waterford, University College Cork, Dunmore Road, Waterford, Ireland
| | - Jessica M Ryan
- Department of Academic Surgery, University Hospital Waterford, University College Cork, Dunmore Road, Waterford, Ireland
| | - Megan Power-Foley
- Department of Academic Surgery, University Hospital Waterford, University College Cork, Dunmore Road, Waterford, Ireland
| | - Peter M Neary
- Department of Academic Surgery, University Hospital Waterford, University College Cork, Dunmore Road, Waterford, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gelpke K, Hamminga JTH, van Bastelaar JJ, de Vos B, Bodegom ME, Heineman E, Hofker HS, El Moumni M, Haveman JW. Reducing the negative appendectomy rate with the laparoscopic appendicitis score; a multicenter prospective cohort and validation study. Int J Surg 2020; 79:257-264. [PMID: 32387211 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2019] [Revised: 04/05/2020] [Accepted: 04/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Approximately nine percent of all acute appendectomies are unintentionally performed on a normal appendix. Failure of treatment (negative appendectomy or missed appendicitis) is associated with higher morbidity and mortality when compared to appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis. The Laparoscopic APPendicitis (LAPP) score was developed in order to systematically evaluate the appendix for the presence of inflammation. This study aims to determine whether the LAPP score reduces the negative appendectomy rate without missing appendicitis. METHODS From September 2013 through May 2016, 322 adult patients presenting with a clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis and an indication for diagnostic laparoscopy were included and analyzed in this multicenter prospective validation study. Depending on the LAPP score, the appendix was either removed (n = 300) or left in situ (n = 22). These patients were compared to a historical control group of 584 patients treated at the same hospitals. The appendix was examined by a pathologist and the negative appendectomy rate was calculated. RESULTS The negative appendectomy rate was significantly lower when the LAPP score was used (4,7% vs. 8,4%; P = 0,034). None of the patients with a negative LAPP score, in which the appendix remained in situ, developed acute appendicitis within three months. There were no significant differences in operation time, complications, or readmissions. Using the LAPP score was associated with significantly higher rates of preoperative radiological imaging (98% vs. 70%; P < 0,001). After adjusting for covariables, including radiological imaging, use of the LAPP score led to fewer treatment failures when compared to not using the LAPP score (OR: 0,48, 95% C.I. 0,251 to 0,914; P = 0,025). CONCLUSION The LAPP score is a safe and simple tool to reduce the negative appendectomy rate during laparoscopic surgery without missing cases of acute appendicitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen Gelpke
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Jenneke T H Hamminga
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - James J van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen & Heerlen, the Netherlands
| | - Bart de Vos
- Department of Surgery, Wilhelmina Hospital, Assen, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten E Bodegom
- Department of Surgery, Bethesda Hospital, Hoogeveen, the Netherlands
| | - Erik Heineman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - H Sijbrand Hofker
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Mostafa El Moumni
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Di Saverio S, Podda M, De Simone B, Ceresoli M, Augustin G, Gori A, Boermeester M, Sartelli M, Coccolini F, Tarasconi A, De' Angelis N, Weber DG, Tolonen M, Birindelli A, Biffl W, Moore EE, Kelly M, Soreide K, Kashuk J, Ten Broek R, Gomes CA, Sugrue M, Davies RJ, Damaskos D, Leppäniemi A, Kirkpatrick A, Peitzman AB, Fraga GP, Maier RV, Coimbra R, Chiarugi M, Sganga G, Pisanu A, De' Angelis GL, Tan E, Van Goor H, Pata F, Di Carlo I, Chiara O, Litvin A, Campanile FC, Sakakushev B, Tomadze G, Demetrashvili Z, Latifi R, Abu-Zidan F, Romeo O, Segovia-Lohse H, Baiocchi G, Costa D, Rizoli S, Balogh ZJ, Bendinelli C, Scalea T, Ivatury R, Velmahos G, Andersson R, Kluger Y, Ansaloni L, Catena F. Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines. World J Emerg Surg 2020; 15:27. [PMID: 32295644 PMCID: PMC7386163 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-020-00306-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 430] [Impact Index Per Article: 107.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. METHODS This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. CONCLUSIONS The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Salomone Di Saverio
- Cambridge Colorectal Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
- Department of General Surgery, University of Insubria, University Hospital of Varese, ASST Sette Laghi, Regione Lombardia, Varese, Italy.
| | - Mauro Podda
- Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Cagliari University Hospital, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Belinda De Simone
- Emergency and Trauma Surgery Department, Maggiore Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Marco Ceresoli
- Emergency and General Surgery Department, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Goran Augustin
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Centre of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Alice Gori
- Maggiore Hospital Regional Emergency Surgery and Trauma Center, Bologna Local Health District, Bologna, Italy
| | - Marja Boermeester
- Department of Surgery, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Federico Coccolini
- General, Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Antonio Tarasconi
- Emergency and Trauma Surgery Department, Maggiore Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Nicola De' Angelis
- Department of Digestive, Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Henri Mondor University Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Dieter G Weber
- Trauma and General Surgeon Royal Perth Hospital & The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | - Matti Tolonen
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Abdominal Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Arianna Birindelli
- Department of General Surgery, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale, di Valle Camonica, Italy
| | - Walter Biffl
- Queen's Medical Center, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Ernest E Moore
- Denver Health System - Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, USA
| | - Michael Kelly
- Acute Surgical Unit, Canberra Hospital, ACT, Canberra, Australia
| | - Kjetil Soreide
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Jeffry Kashuk
- Department of Surgery, University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Richard Ten Broek
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Carlos Augusto Gomes
- Department of Surgery Hospital Universitario, Universidade General de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil
| | | | - Richard Justin Davies
- Cambridge Colorectal Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Dimitrios Damaskos
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
| | - Ari Leppäniemi
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Abdominal Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Andrew Kirkpatrick
- General, Acute Care, Abdominal Wall Reconstruction, and Trauma Surgery, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Andrew B Peitzman
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, UPMC-Presbyterian, Pittsburgh, USA
| | - Gustavo P Fraga
- Faculdade de Ciências Médicas (FCM) - Unicamp, Campinas, SP, Brazil
| | - Ronald V Maier
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Raul Coimbra
- UCSD Health System - Hillcrest Campus Department of Surgery Chief Division of Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Burns, and Acute Care Surgery, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Massimo Chiarugi
- General, Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Gabriele Sganga
- Department of Emergency Surgery, "A. Gemelli Hospital", Catholic University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Adolfo Pisanu
- Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Cagliari University Hospital, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Gian Luigi De' Angelis
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, University Hospital of Parma, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Edward Tan
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Harry Van Goor
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Francesco Pata
- Department of Surgery, Nicola Giannettasio Hospital, Corigliano-Rossano, and La Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Isidoro Di Carlo
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "GF Ingrassia", Cannizzaro Hospital, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
| | | | - Andrey Litvin
- Department of Surgery, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad, Russia
| | - Fabio C Campanile
- Department of Surgery, San Giovanni Decollato Andosilla Hospital, Viterbo, Italy
| | - Boris Sakakushev
- General Surgery Department, Medical University, University Hospital St George, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Gia Tomadze
- Department of Surgery, Tbilisi State Medical University, TSMU, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Zaza Demetrashvili
- Department of Surgery, Tbilisi State Medical University, TSMU, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Rifat Latifi
- Section of Acute Care Surgery, Westchester Medical Center, Department of Surgery, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA
| | - Fakri Abu-Zidan
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, UAE University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
| | | | | | - Gianluca Baiocchi
- Surgical Clinic, Department of Experimental and Clinical Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - David Costa
- Hospital universitario de Alicante, departamento de Cirugia General, Alicante, Spain
| | - Sandro Rizoli
- Department of Surgery, St. Michael Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Zsolt J Balogh
- Department of Traumatology, John Hunter Hospital and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | - Cino Bendinelli
- Department of Traumatology, John Hunter Hospital and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | | | - Rao Ivatury
- Professor Emeritus Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - George Velmahos
- Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | | | - Yoram Kluger
- Division of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- Department of General Surgery and Trauma, Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy
| | - Fausto Catena
- Emergency and Trauma Surgery Department, Maggiore Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|