Standardized irrigation technique reduces intraabdominal abscess after appendectomy

Transperineal drainage of prostate abscesses: A minimally invasive, low-risk management strategy that yields satisfactory results

Objectives

In this narrative review, we aim to present two cases of transperineal drainage of prostate abscesses with a good clinical outcome. Furthermore, we reviewed the literature on this treatment approach and aim to propose a minimally invasive protocol for managing this rare condition.

Patients and Methods

Our patients are 33- and 61-year-old males who both underwent uncomplicated transperineal drainage of prostate abscess with the use of a Precision Point device with rapid clinical improvement and complete resolution of the abscess within the follow-up period. We used PubMed to conduct a literature search and included and evaluated 16 relevant case reports and case series in which the authors utilized transperineal drainage techniques for prostatic abscesses.

Results

Our first patient was young and very unwell with sepsis and a pulmonary embolism. He had a complex abscess extending through the prostate to the left pelvic side wall. Trans-gluteal drainage of the pelvic side-wall collection was required in addition to transperineal drainage of the prostate abscess. After drainage and a prolonged course of antibiotics, he achieved resolution of the abscess by 7 weeks with ejaculatory function intact. Our second patient who was very keen on the preservation of ejaculatory function had multiple small abscesses and underwent transperineal drainage. He had significant interval improvement of his abscess burden at the 4-week follow-up and complete resolution at the 6-month follow-up. The total number of cases in the literature on our review is 22, with considerable variability in how the authors managed the prostate abscesses that underwent transperineal drainage, including variability in their follow-up time frame, choice of imaging modality, duration of antibiotic treatment, drain placement, and use of irrigation solutions (including antibiotics) into the abscess cavity. Furthermore, the sizes of the prostate abscesses were not consistently reported. Given the small sample size and variability in management from different authors, it was not possible to draw any statistical analysis.

Conclusion

Transperineal prostate abscess drainage combined with prolonged antibiotic therapy provides a less invasive alternative to treating prostate abscesses for those who which to preserve ejaculatory function and avoid the other adverse events of transurethral de-roofing. In itself, it can achieve complete resolution of abscess. It provides the benefit of drainage under real-time imaging; for percutaneous drain placement; prevents urethral injury; retrograde ejaculation; and can be done under local anaesthetic which is preferable for the unstable patient. The utility of the procedure may be limited by the complexity of the abscess or whether it has extended beyond the prostate. The patient should always be informed that further drainage via percutaneous methods or transurethral methods may be necessary if their clinical condition does not improve. We recommend this procedure be offered as an alternative to transurethral methods in younger patients and those who would like to preserve ejaculatory function. Furthermore, we highly encourage a prolonged course of antibiotic therapy and interval follow-up with clinical review of symptoms and imaging to confirm resolution.

Intermediate-term evaluation of interval appendectomy in the pediatric population

BACKGROUND

Initial non-operative management of children with complicated appendicitis has been well studied but when comparing emergency procedures the long-term effectiveness of interval appendectomy remains undefined. This study aimed to determine the effects of interval appendectomy from the perspective of long-term follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with complicated appendicitis between 2010 and 2017 was performed. The medical records of 471 patients with initial non-operative therapy and 377 patients treated with emergency appendectomy who served as controls were reviewed. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for any potential selection bias in the two strategies. A comparison of the clinical outcomes, including short- and long-term postoperative complications, was conducted in the 348 matched patients.

RESULTS

On presentation, there were no differences in age, weight, sex distribution, white blood cell (WBC), or procalcitonin (PCT) between the two groups, except for days of symptoms. The patients undergoing emergency appendectomy had a high American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score (p = 0.002). The patients who underwent initial non-operative therapy had a lower complication rate, including surgical wound infection [odds ratio (OR), 3.77; 95% CI 2.59-5.50; p < 0.001) and postoperative peritonitis or abscess (OR, 3.81; 95% CI 1.79-8.12; p < 0.001) than those who underwent emergency appendectomy. Furthermore, the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) was lower in patients who underwent initial non-operative therapy than in patients who underwent emergency appendectomy (OR, 4.6; 95% CI 0.99-21.41; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial non-operative therapy with interval appendectomy was feasible for most patients with appendiceal abscesses and had advantages in terms of postoperative complications, especially regarding long-term obstruction events. Therefore, initial non-operative therapy with interval appendectomy should be considered the first treatment of choice for pediatric patients with complicated appendicitis.

Does peritoneal lavage influence the rate of complications following pediatric Laparoscopic Appendicectomy in Children with Complicated Appendicitis? A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate concerning the use of peritoneal irrigation in the setting of complicated appendicitis (CA) in children. Our aim was to conduct a prospective randomized controlled trial for the treatment of CA during a laparoscopic appendicectomy in children.

METHODS

Following ethical approval (REC10138B), pediatric patients (≤16 years old) were recruited from a single institution over a 3-year time period (2015-2018). Randomization occurred following intraoperative diagnosis of CA to either peritoneal lavage (PL) or suction only (SO). Primary outcome was the length of stay (LoS), and secondary outcomes were the presence of a postoperative intraabdominal abscess (IAA), wound infection (WI), or adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO). Data are reported as number of cases (%), median (range), odds ratio [OR] and analyzed using t-test and Fisher's exact test. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 100 pediatric patients were recruited into the trial. Sixteen were excluded owing to either recruitment or protocol violations, and therefore a total of 86 underwent final analysis: 44 PL and 42 SO. There was no significant difference in the LoS: 5.7 (PL) vs 5.6 (SO) days, p = 0.75. Only 1 IAA occurred in the PL group: 1/44(2.3%) vs 0/42(0%), p = 1.0. There was 1 ASBOs in the PL group (2.3%, p = 1.0) and no WIs in either of the groups.

CONCLUSION

This prospective randomized control trial has revealed equivalence in techniques for the treatment of complicated appendicitis. It has also revealed a low complication rate following pediatric LA with either PL or SO.

TYPE OF STUDY

Randomized controlled trial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Volume of Irrigation Does Not Affect Rate of Abscess in Perforated Appendicitis

Background: Although previous studies have evaluated whether use of irrigation decreases postoperative intraabdominal abscess (PO-IAA) formation, these studies treated irrigation as a dichotomous variable and concluded that no irrigation resulted in a decreased incidence of PO-IAA formation. However, a recent study found decreased incidence with small aliquots to a total volume of 6 L. We hypothesized that higher volumes of irrigation would result in a lower incidence of PO-IAA. Materials and Methods: A postoperative template was developed as a quality improvement initiative and included descriptors for complex appendicitis and volume of irrigation. Data were prospectively collected from February 2016 to December 2018. Patients with complex appendicitis (fibropurulent exudate, extraluminal fecalith, well-formed abscess, visible hole in the appendix) were identified and analyzed by using standard statistical analysis. Volume of irrigation was categorized for analysis. Results: Two thousand three hundred six appendicitis patients were identified; 408 had complex appendicitis (17.7%). Three hundred eighty-four patients with complex appendicitis had documented irrigation volumes. The overall incidence of PO-IAA was 13.8%. Irrigation was commonly used (92.7%). The median amount of irrigation was 1000 mL (500 mL, 2500 mL), but it ranged from none to 9000 mL. There was no overall difference in the volume of irrigation used between those who developed a PO-IAA and those who did not (P = .34). No specific intraoperative finding was associated with the development of PO-IAA. Increasing volume of irrigation did not lower PO-IAA incidence (P = .24). Conclusions: The volume of irrigation did not appear to affect the rate of PO-IAA formation. The use of irrigation should be left to the discretion of the operating surgeon.