Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis as Day Case Surgery: Feasibility and a Critical Analysis of Exclusion Criteria and Treatment Failure

Ambulatory appendectomy for acute appendicitis: Can we treat all the patients? A prospective study of 451 consecutive ambulatory appendectomies out of nearly 2,000 procedures

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis represents the leading cause of acute gastrointestinal disorders, but only a small series regarding ambulatory appendectomies are available. The aim of this study was to report the results of ambulatory (day-case) appendectomy for acute appendicitis in a large consecutive cohort and to improve selection criteria in order to extend the indications.

METHODS

All appendectomy procedures for acute appendicitis (March 2013 to June 2020) were included retrospectively. Criteria to select patients eligible for ambulatory appendectomy were based on our clinico-radiological St-Antoine's score ≥4.

RESULTS

In total, 1,730 consecutive patients had an appendectomy for acute appendicitis: 1,279 (74%) in conventional settings and 451 (26%) in ambulatory settings. In the conventional group, 360 (28%) patients had surgery deferred to the next morning, whereas in the ambulatory group, 309 patients (70%) were readmitted the next morning (P < .0001). In the ambulatory group, 376 (83%) patients satisfied the criteria (score ≥4), and 90.9% were discharged on postoperative day 0. Rates of unplanned consultation and readmission were not significantly different (5.1% vs 6.6% P = .243). Multivariate analysis of the entire cohort confirmed absence of radiological perforation as highly predictive of early discharge (odds ratio = 6.073). In our cohort, these patients had an early discharge rate of 86.4% compared to 90.2% in those with a St-Antoine's score ≥4. Considering only radiological evidence of perforation as a selection criterion for ambulatory appendectomy, 581 more patients would be eligible for ambulatory surgery (+60%).

CONCLUSION

Ambulatory surgery for acute appendicitis based on St-Antoine's score is safe. We propose to extend the indication for ambulatory management to all patients without radiological evidence of perforation.

Ambulatory Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Does the Conventional Approach Need a Reappraisal?

A Deucalione, acute abdomen remains significant in abdominal pain. The entity of acute abdomen accounts for up to 10% of all emergency admissions. The differences between countries' income and level of prosperity are pertinent, particularly in terms of severity, radiological modalities, and surgical management of the condition. Of note, surgical modalities have been the most widely used treatment modality, and current evidence indicates that the laparoscopic approach, per se, is the most effective surgical therapy with a lower incidence of wound infection, post-intervention morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and better quality of life scores compared to the conventional method. In light of this, the present study aimed to evaluate ambulatory appendectomy in a series of sequential laparoscopic appendectomies (LApp), which included both complicated and uncomplicated cases.

Short-term Outcomes of Day-Case Stoma Closure: A Prospective, Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Elective stoma closure is a common, standardized procedure in digestive surgery.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of day-case surgery for elective stoma closure.

DESIGN

This is a prospective, single-center, nonrandomized study of consecutive patients undergoing day-case elective stoma closure.

SETTING

This study was performed at a French tertiary hospital between January 2016 and June 2018.

PATIENTS

Elective stoma closure was performed by local incision with an ASA score of I, II, or stabilized III.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was the day-case surgery success rate in the overall population (all patients having undergone elective stoma closure) and in the per protocol population (patients not fulfilling any of the preoperative or perioperative exclusion criteria). The secondary end points (in the per protocol population) were the overall morbidity rate (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification), the major morbidity rate (Clavien score ≥3), and day-case surgery quality criteria (unplanned consultation, unplanned hospitalization, and unplanned reoperation).

RESULTS

Between January 2016 and June 2018, 236 patients (the overall population; mean ± SD age: 54 ± 17; 120 men (51%)) underwent elective stoma closure. Fifty of these patients (21%) met all the inclusion criteria and constituted the per protocol population. The day-case surgery success rate was 17% (40 of 236 patients) in the overall population and 80% (40 of 50 patients) in the per protocol population. In the per protocol population, the overall morbidity rate was 30% and the major morbidity rate was 6%. Of the 40 patients with successful day-case surgery, the unplanned consultation rate and the unplanned hospitalization rate were both 32.5%. There were no unplanned reoperations.

LIMITATIONS

This was a single-center study.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, day-case surgery for elective stoma closure is feasible and has acceptable complication and readmission rates. Day-case elective stoma closure can therefore be legitimately offered to selected patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B583.

RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO DEL CIERRE DE ESTOMA AMBULATORIO UN ESTUDIO OBSERVACIONAL Y PROSPECTIVO

ANTECEDENTES:El cierre electivo de un estoma es un procedimiento común y estandarizado en cirugía digestiva.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la viabilidad de la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre electivo de estomas.DISEÑO:Un estudio prospectivo, unicéntrico, no aleatorizado de pacientes consecutivos sometidos a cierre de estoma electivo ambulatorio.ESCENARIO:Un hospital terciario francés entre enero de 2016 y junio de 2018.PACIENTES:Cierre electivo de estoma realizado por incisión local con una puntuación de la American Society of Anesthesiologists de I, II o III estabilizado.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal fue la tasa de éxito de la cirugía ambulatoria en la población general (todos los pacientes habiendo sido sometidos a cierre de estoma electivo) y en la población por protocolo (pacientes que no cumplían con ninguno de los criterios de exclusión preoperatorios o perioperatorios). Los resultados secundarios (en la población por protocolo) fueron la tasa de morbilidad general (según la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo), la tasa de morbilidad mayor (puntuación de Clavien ≥ 3) y los criterios de calidad de la cirugía ambulatoria (consulta no planificada, hospitalización no planificada y reoperación no planificada).RESULTADOS:Entre enero de 2016 y junio de 2018, 236 pacientes (la población general; edad media ± desviación estándar: 54 ± 17; 120 hombres (51%)) se sometieron al cierre electivo del estoma. Cincuenta de estos pacientes (21%) cumplieron todos los criterios de inclusión y constituyeron la población por protocolo. La tasa de éxito de la cirugía ambulatoria fue del 17% (40 de 236 pacientes) en la población general y del 80% (40 de 50 pacientes) en la población por protocolo. En la población por protocolo, la tasa de morbilidad general fue del 30% y la tasa de morbilidad mayor fue del 6%. De los 40 pacientes con cirugía ambulatoria exitosa, la tasa de consultas no planificadas y la tasa de hospitalización no planificada fueron ambas del 32.5%. No hubo reoperaciones no planificadas.LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio de un solo centro.CONCLUSIÓN:En pacientes seleccionados, la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre electivo de estoma es factible y tiene tasas aceptables de complicaciones y reingreso. Por lo tanto, se puede ofrecer legítimamente el cierre electivo ambulatorio de estoma a pacientes seleccionados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B583.

Same-day discharge after appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Patients presenting with acute appendicitis are usually hospitalized for a few days for appendectomy and postoperative recovery. Shortening length of stay may reduce costs and improve patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of same-day discharge after appendectomy for acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to April 14, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and selected studies that addressed discharge on the same calendar day as the appendectomy. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool. Main outcomes were hospital readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits in the postoperative course. A random effects model was used to pool risk ratios for the main outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1912 articles screened, 17 comparative studies and 8 non-comparative studies met the inclusion criteria. Most only included laparoscopic procedure for uncomplicated appendicitis. Most studies were considered at moderate or serious risk of bias. In meta-analysis, same-day discharge (vs. overnight hospitalization) was not associated with increased rates of readmission, complication, and unplanned hospital visits. Non-comparative studies demonstrated low rates of readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits after same-day discharge.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that same-day discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis is safe without an increased risk of readmission, complications, or unplanned hospital visits. Hence, same-day discharge may be further encouraged in selected patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration no. CRD42018115948.

The value of post-operative antibiotic therapy after laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated acute appendicitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase III study (ABAP study)

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of appendectomies are for complicated acute appendicitis (CAA). With laparoscopy, the main post-operative complication is deep abscesses (12% of cases of CAA, versus 4% for open surgery). A recent cohort study compared short and long courses of postoperative antibiotic therapy in patients with CAA. There was no significant intergroup difference in the post-operative complication rate (12% of organ/space surgical site infection (SSI)). Moreover, antibiotic therapy is increasingly less indicated for other situations (non-complicated appendicitis, post-operative course of cholecystitis, perianal abscess), calling into question whether post-operative antibiotic therapy is required after laparoscopic appendectomy for CAA.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is a prospective, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized (1:1), double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase III non-inferiority study with blind evaluation of the primary efficacy criterion. The primary objective is to evaluate the impact of the absence of post-operative antibiotic therapy on the organ/space surgical site infection (SSI) rate in patients presenting with CAA (other than in cases of generalized peritonitis). Patients in the experimental group will receive at least one dose of preoperative and perioperative antibiotic therapy (2 g ceftriaxone by intravenous injection every 24 h up to the operation) and metronidazole (500 mg by intravenous injection every 8 h up to the operation) and, in the post-operative period, a placebo for ceftriaxone (2 g/24 h in one intravenous injection) and a placebo for metronidazole (1500 mg/24 h in three intravenous injections, for 3 days). In the control group, patients will receive at least one dose of preoperative and perioperative antibiotic therapy (2 g ceftriaxone by intravenous injection every 24 h up to the operation) and metronidazole (500 mg by intravenous injection every 8 h up to the operation) and, in the post-operative period, antibiotic therapy (ceftriaxone 2 g/24 h and metronidazole 1500 mg/24 h for 3 days). In the event of allergy to ceftriaxone, it will be replaced by levofloxacin (500 mg/24 h in one intravenous injection, for 3 days). The expected organ space SSI rate is 12% in the population of patients with CAA operated on by laparoscopy. With a non-inferiority margin of 5%, a two-sided alpha risk of 5%, a beta risk of 20%, and a loss-to-follow-up rate of 10%, the calculated sample size is 1476 included patients, i.e., 738 per group. Due to three interim analyses at 10%, 25%, and 50% of the planned sample size, the total sample size increases to 1494 patients (747 per arm).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethical authorization by the Comité de Protection des Personnes and the Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament: ID-RCB 2017-00334-59. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688295) on 28 September 2018.

Ambulatory versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Ambulatory laparoscopic appendectomy has gained popularity due to the improved understanding of patient selection criteria, the application of enhanced recovery pathways, and the potential for improving healthcare resource utilization. The aim of the review was to compare the morbidity and readmission rates between ambulatory and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Studies from 2014 to 2018, on adult patients undergoing ambulatory LA, were considered. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool the total number of complications and readmission events in the ambulatory and conventional groups.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies met our inclusion criteria accounting for 7079 total of patients with acute appendicitis treated by ambulatory LA and 6370 patients treated by conventional LA. We included four observational studies (two prospective and two retrospective) and one randomized controlled trial. Length of stay was significantly lower in the ambulatory group (mean difference = - 15.63 h, 95% CI = - 21.78 to - 9.49, P = < 0.00001). The relative risk (RR) of reoperation was 0.49 (95% CI = 0.12-1.95, P = 0.31). The results demonstrated a pooled RR of overall morbidity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.65-0.97, P = 0.02) and a pooled RR of readmission of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.59-0.88, P = 0.002), both results favoring the ambulatory LA group.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of high-quality comparative studies making conclusive recommendations not possible at this time. Based on current data, ambulatory LA may be safe and feasible as compared with conventional LA.

Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis as Day Case Surgery: Can Outcomes of a Prospective Study Be Reproduced in Real Life?

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of day case surgery (DCS) appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (UCAA) was evaluated by the prospective AppendAmbu (Feasibility of Outpatient Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis) study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01839435). The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-life feasibility of DCS for UCAA.

STUDY DESIGN

This single-center, retrospective, non-interventional study was conducted after the AppendAmbu study and included UCAA only. The primary end point was DCS success rate (ie length of stay <12 hours) in the intention-to-treat population (all patients with UCAA) and in the per-protocol population (population with UCAA and no preoperative and intraoperative exclusion criteria). The secondary end points were to determine the DCS quality criteria to evaluate and compare the morbidity and mortality of DCS and conventional hospitalization for UCAA (Clavien, Comprehensive Complication Index) and to externally validate the St Antoine criteria for the selection of patients for DCS.

RESULTS

From January 2016 to September 2017, two hundred and ninety-six patients underwent operations for acute appendicitis. The proportion of patients with successful DCS management was 27% in the intention-to-treat population and 95% in the per-protocol population. The unplanned consultation rate was 15%, the unplanned hospitalization rate was 4%, and the unplanned reoperation rate was 0%. The postoperative morbidity of patients managed by DCS was not different from that of patients managed in conventional hospitalization. The DCS success rate was 0%, with a St Antoine score of 0, and 80% of patients had a St Antoine score of 5 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Day case surgery constitutes progress in surgery as a result of enhanced recovery programs. It avoids unnecessary prolonged hospitalization.

Surgeon's Definition of Complicated Appendicitis: A Prospective Video Survey Study

Aim

Definition of the type of appendicitis is based on examination of the peritoneum and appendix. Gomes et al. proposed a laparoscopic grading system of acute appendicitis (grades 1 and 2, noncomplicated appendicitis, grade 3-5 complicated appendicitis). The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of this score.

Patients and methods

All patients managed for acute appendicitis between January 2016 and June 2016 were included in this single-center prospective study. Laparoscopic appendectomy procedures were filmed by analogy to Sugerbaker's peritoneal carcinomatosis score (9 quadrants, all of the abdomen was filmed). The videos were then analyzed by seven staff surgeons blinded to each other and the operative report. The primary endpoint was to determine the concordance between staff surgeons for grading of appendicitis using the laparoscopic grading system of acute appendicitis described by Gomes et al.

Results

A total of 40 patients were included in this study. A concordance was observed between the seven staff surgeons in 85% of cases. For regional peritonitis, the mean ± (SD) number of quadrants in which the staff surgeons reported signs of peritonitis was 1.44 ± 0.63. For diffuse peritonitis, the mean (SD) number of quadrants in which the staff surgeons reported signs of peritonitis was 2.59 ± 0.51. On ROC curve analysis, two quadrants was the best cut-off between grade 4B (local peritonitis) and five (diffuse peritonitis) acute appendicitis (AUC = 0.92, Se = 100%, Sp = 92%, p = 0.005).

Conclusion

The classification used to determine the type of appendicitis is reproducible.

Clinical significance

To give a definition of complicated appendicitis.

How to cite this article

Mariage M, Sabbagh C, et al. Surgeon's Definition of Complicated Appendicitis: A Prospective Video Survey Study. Euroasian J Hepatogastroenterol 2019;9(1):1-4.

Effect of Time to Operation on Value of Care in Acute Care Surgery

BACKGROUND

As reimbursement models evolve, there is increasing emphasis on maximizing value-based care for inpatient conditions. We hypothesized that longer intervals between admission and surgery would be associated with worse outcomes and increased costs for acute care surgery patients, and that these associations would be strongest among patients with high-risk conditions.

METHODS

We performed a 5-year retrospective analysis of three risk cohorts: appendectomy (low-risk for morbidity and mortality, n = 618), urgent hernia repair (intermediate-risk, n = 80), and laparotomy for intra-abdominal sepsis with temporary abdominal closure (sTAC; high-risk, n = 102). Associations between the interval from admission to surgery and outcomes including infectious complications, mortality, length of stay, and hospital charges were assessed by regression modeling.

RESULTS

Median intervals between admission and surgery for appendectomy, hernia repair, and sTAC were 9.3, 13.5, and 8.1 h, respectively, and did not significantly impact infectious complications or mortality. For appendectomy, each 1 h increase from admission to surgery was associated with increased hospital LOS by 1.1 h (p = 0.002) and increased intensive care unit (ICU) LOS by 0.3 h (p = 0.011). For hernia repair, each 1 h increase from admission to surgery was associated with increased antibiotic duration by 1.6 h (p = 0.007), increased hospital LOS by 3.3 h (p = 0.002), increased ICU LOS by 1.5 h (p = 0.001), and increased hospital charges by $1918 (p < 0.001). For sTAC, each 1 h increase from admission to surgery was associated with increased antibiotic duration by 5.0 h (p = 0.006), increased hospital LOS by 3.9 h (p = 0.046), increased ICU LOS by 3.5 h (p = 0.040), and increased hospital charges by $3919 (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Longer intervals from admission to surgery were associated with prolonged antibiotic administration, longer hospital and ICU length of stay, and increased hospital charges, with strongest effects among high-risk patients. To improve value of care for acute care surgery patients, operations should proceed as soon as resuscitation is complete.

Should ambulatory appendectomy become the standard treatment for acute appendicitis?

Background

Appendectomy is increasingly performed as a 'short stay' or 'ambulatory' procedure, yet there is no consensus for selection of patients with acute appendicitis for ambulatory surgery (AS). We aimed to compare characteristics and outcomes of complicated and uncomplicated appendectomies performed in ambulatory vs. conventional settings, and to determine factors associated with unexpected re-consultations and re-hospitalizations.

Methods

The authors reviewed a consecutive series of 185 laparoscopic appendectomies. Whenever possible, patients were offered AS, defined as 'discharge on the same working day.' Multivariable regressions were performed to determine associations of unexpected re-consultations and re-hospitalizations with surgery type (ambulatory or conventional) and patient characteristics (age, gender, obesity, symptoms, appendicolith, perforations, appendix diameter, serologic results, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and Saint-Antoine score).

Results

From the initial cohort, 117 patients (63.2%) were eligible for AS, of which 8 had peri- or post-operative contraindications. Therefore, 109 patients (58.9%) were operated by AS, with median length of stay 8.5 h (range, 3.3-20.5). Ambulatory cases had a lower incidence of complications (11.9%) than conventional cases (25.0%) (p = 0.029). Uni- and multi-variable regressions revealed that unexpected re-consultations were not significantly associated with any of the pre- or peri-operative variables but that unexpected re-hospitalizations were 4 times more likely for patients with appendicolith (OR, 4.32; p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Ambulatory surgery could be considered as a standard procedure for both complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Appendicolith was found to be an independent risk factor for unexpected re-hospitalization and should therefore trigger closer monitoring.

Distinguishing fecal appendicular peritonitis from purulent appendicular peritonitis

INTRODUCTION

Fecal appendicular peritonitis (FAP) is a poorly studied, rare form of acute appendicitis, corresponding to peritoneal inflammation with the presence of feces secondary to ruptured appendix. The purpose of this study was to describe FAP and to compare FAP with purulent appendicular peritonitis (PAP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study was conducted in consecutive patients to compare the FAP group and the PAP group. The primary endpoint was the 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The secondary endpoints were description and comparison of intraoperative data (laparoscopy rate, conversion rate, type of procedure and the mean operating time), and short-term outcomes (types of complications, length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate), comparison of intraoperative bacteriological samples of FAP and PAP as well as the rate of resistance to amoxicillin and clavulanic acid, used as routine postoperative antibiotic therapy.

RESULTS

Between January 2006 and January 2016, 2.2% of appendectomies were performed for FAP. Patients of the FAP group reported a longer history of pain than patients of the PAP group (mean: 58 h [range: 24-120] vs 24 h [range: 6-504], p = 0.0001) and hyperthermia was more frequent in the FAP group than in the PAP group (72% vs 26%, p = 0.0001). Mean preoperative CRP was also higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (110 mg/L [range: 67-468] vs 37.5 mg/L [range: 3.1-560], p = 0.007). Significantly less patients were operated by laparoscopy in the FAP group (89.7% vs 96.6%, p < 0.0001). Mean length of stay was significantly longer in the FAP group than in the PAP group (10 days [range: 3-24] vs 5 days [range: 1-32], p = 0.001). The overall 30-day complication rate was significantly higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (62.1% vs 24.7%, p = 0.0005). The readmission rate was not significantly different between the two groups (14% vs 11.2%, p = 0.2), but the reoperation rate was higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (31% vs 11%, p = 0.01). No significant difference was observed between the FAP and PAP groups in terms of the positive culture rate (75.9% vs 65.6%, p = 0.3). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of resistance to amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (18.2% vs 20.5%, p = 0.8).

CONCLUSION

FAP is associated with significantly more severe morbidity compared to PAP. Clinicians must be familiar with this form of appendicitis in order to adequately inform their patients.