Is preoperative distinction between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis feasible without imaging?

Usefulness of extended inflammatory parameters related to neutrophil activation reported by Sysmex XN-1000 hematology analyzer for predicting complicated acute appendicitis. Comparison with canonical inflammatory laboratory tests

AIM

Accurate diagnosis of complicated appendicitis is of importance to ensure that patients receive early and effective treatment, minimizing the risk of postoperative complications to promote successful recovery. Biochemical markers are a promising tool to identify complicated appendicitis. We aimed to evaluate the potential role of novel parameters related with neutrophil activation, known as "Extended Inflammation Parameters" (EIP), included in blood cell count reported by Sysmex XN-Series analyzers, compared to other canonical biomarkers in identifying complicated appendicitis.

METHOD

Prospective observational study including patients with confirmed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, cell blood count, including white blood cell (WBC), absolute neutrophil (ANC) and immature granulocyte (IG) count and EIP (neutrophil reactivity [NEUT-RI] and granularity intensity [NEUT-GI]) were analyzed before surgery. Their accuracy to diagnose complicated appendicitis was tested in an ROC curve analysis.

RESULTS

Our population study included 119 patients, and appendicitis was complicated in 58 (48.7%). NLR, CRP and procalcitonin levels, ANC and IG count and NEUT-RI and NEUT-GI were higher in patients with complicated appendicitis. Regarding accuracy for complicated appendicitis, CRP was the biomarker with the highest performance (ROC AUC: 0.829), with an optimal cutoff of 73.1 mg/L (sensitivity: 63.8%, specificity: 88.5%). NEUT-RI and NEUT-GI achieved both significant but poor accuracy, with ROC AUC of 0.606 and 0.637, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel laboratory tests reported by Sysmex XN-Series analyzers have poor accuracy for identifying complicated appendicitis. In this study, CRP was the biomarker with the highest performance and may be useful as predictor of the severity of acute appendicitis.

Parsimonious clinical prediction model for the diagnosis of complicated appendicitis

Objective

To develop a logistic regression model that combines clinical and radiological parameters for prediction of complicated appendicitis.

Methods

248 patients with histologically proven uncomplicated (n = 214) and complicated (n = 34) acute appendicitis were analyzed retrospectively. All patients had undergone a presurgical abdominal and/or pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan, assessed by two radiologists. A model using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses was developed, and the strength of association between independent predictors and complicated acute appendicitis was evaluated by adjusted odds radio. Clinical parameters were gender, age, anorexia, vomiting, duration of symptoms, right lower abdominal quadrant (RLQ) tenderness, rebound tenderness, body temperature, white blood cell (WBC) count, and neutrophil ratio. Radiological parameters were appendix diameter, appendicolith, caecal wall thickening, mesenteric lymphadenopathy, extraluminal air, abscess, fat stranding, and periappendicular fluid.

Results

Four features (body temperature＞37.2 °C, vomiting, appendicolith, and periappendiceal fluid) were included in the logistic regression model, and yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.80-0.93), sensitive of 88%, and specificity of 74%.

Conclusion

The logistic regression model makes an accurate and simple prediction of complicated appendicitis possible.

The Diagnostic Differentiation Challenge in Acute Appendicitis: How to Distinguish between Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis in Adults

(1) Background: How to best define, diagnose and differentiate uncomplicated from complicated acute appendicitis remains debated. Hence, the aim of this review was to present an overview of the current knowledge and emerging field of acute appendicitis with a focus on the diagnostic differentiation of severity currently subject to ongoing investigations. (2) Methods: We conducted a PubMed search using the MeSH terms “appendicitis AND severity” and “appendicitis AND classification”, with a focus on studies calling appendicitis as ‘uncomplicated’ or ‘complicated’. An emphasis on the last 5 years was stressed, with further studies selected for their contribution to the theme. Further studies were retrieved from identified full-text articles and included per the authors’ discretion. (3) Results: The assumption that appendicitis invariably will proceed to perforation has been outdated. Both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis exist with likely different pathophysiology. Hence, this makes it important to differentiate disease severity. Clinicians must diagnose appendicitis, but, in the next step, also differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in order to allow for management decisions. Diagnostic accuracy without supportive imaging is around 75–80% and, based on clinical judgement and blood tests alone, the negative appendectomy rate has been described as high as 36%. More research is needed on available biomarkers, and the routine use of imaging still remains debated. Scoring systems have the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, but no scoring system has yet been validated for differentiating disease severity. Currently, no universally agreed definition exists on what constitutes a complicated appendicitis. (4) Conclusions: Uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis appear to have different pathophysiology and should be treated differently. The differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis remains a diagnostic challenge.

Prediction of peritoneal soiling in acute appendicitis with simple clinical and laboratory data. Prospective, multicenter, cohort study of 2,645 adult patients nationwide

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In order to facilitate the preoperative prediction of complicated appendicitis, we propose a complementary approach by selecting an endpoint defined by the intraoperative finding of peritoneal soiling (PS).

METHODS

Over a 6-month period, 38 centers (5% of all public hospitals) attending emergency general surgery patients on a 24-hour, 7-days a week basis, enrolled consecutive adult patients requiring appendectomy. Patients were stratified according to the absence or the finding of PS during the surgical procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 2645 patients were included; median age (IQR) was 35 (22-51) years, 44.3% were female. The laparoscopic approach was used in 70.8% of appendectomies. In a third of patients (31.7%), there was PS with pus around the appendix, or bowel contents, free pus, or blood in the peritoneal cavity. To develop the prediction model, 1764 patients were randomly selected for the derivation cohort and the remaining 881 patients were assigned to the validation cohort. On multivariable logistic regression analysis of all patients, two clinical variables (age, and pulse) and three laboratory variables (serum urea, serum sodium, and white blood cell count) were individually associated (P < .05) with a greater probability of having PS (Hosmer-Lemeshow chi, 1.63; P = .99; C-statistic, 0.7). Based on the multivariable regression model, both static and dynamic nomograms were developed for the prediction of PS in patients with acute appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The entry of simple clinical and laboratory variables in the dynamic nomogram may be useful in guiding the initial management of patients with acute appendicitis in resource-limited settings.

Predicting complicated appendicitis based on clinical findings: the role of Alvarado and Appendicitis Inflammatory Response scores

PURPOSE

The pre-interventional differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis is decisive for treatment. In the context of conservative therapy, the definitive diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis is mandatory. This study investigates the ability of clinical scoring systems and imaging to differentiate between the two entities.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of two cohorts from two tertiary referral centers in Switzerland and Germany. All consecutive patients underwent appendectomy between January 2008 and April 2013 (in the first cohort) or between January 2017 and June 2019 (the second cohort). Exclusion criteria did not apply as all patients found by the database search and received an appendectomy were included. Diagnostic testing and calculation of a receiver operating curve were performed to identify a cutoff for clinical scores that resulted in a minimum sensitivity of 90% to detect complicated appendicitis. The cutoff was combined with additional diagnostic imaging criteria to see if diagnostic properties could be improved.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifty-six patients were included in the analysis. Two hundred twenty patients (23%) had complicated appendicitis, and 736 patients (77%) had uncomplicated appendicitis or no inflammation. The complicated appendicitis cohort had a mean Alvarado score of 7.03 and a mean AIR of 5.21. This compared to a mean Alvarado of 6.53 and a mean AIR of 4.07 for the uncomplicated appendicitis cohort. The highest Alvarado score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 5 (sensitivity = 95%, specificity 8.99%). The highest AIR score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 3 (sensitivity 91.82%, specificity 18.53). The analysis showed that additional CT information did not improve the sensitivity of the proposed cut-offs.

CONCLUSION

AIR and Alvarado scores showed limited capability to distinguish between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis even with additional imaging in this retrospective cohort. As conservative management of appendicitis needs to exclude patients with complicated disease reliably, appendectomy seems until now to remain the safest option to prevent undertreatment of this mostly benign disease.

Predictive scoring systems to differentiate between simple and complex appendicitis in children (PRE-APP study)

BACKGROUND

Several clinical prediction rules have been developed for preoperative differentiation between simple and complex appendicitis in children, as potential treatment strategies differ. This study aimed to externally validate applicable clinical prediction rules that could be used to differentiate between simple and complex appendicitis in children.

METHODS

Potential clinical prediction rules were identified by a scoping review of the literature. Clinical prediction rules applicable in our daily practice were subsequently externally validated in a multicenter historical cohort consisting of 1 tertiary center and 1 large teaching hospital. All children (<18 years old) with histopathologically confirmed acute appendicitis between 2013 and 2020 were included. Test results of clinical prediction rules were compared to the gold standard of either simple or complex appendicitis consisting of predefined perioperative and histopathological criteria. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were determined for the selected clinical prediction rules. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve >0.7 were considered acceptable and potentially useful.

RESULTS

In total, 31 clinical prediction rules were identified, of which 12 could be evaluated in our cohort consisting of 550 children. The main reason to exclude clinical prediction rules was the use of variables that were not routinely measured in our cohort. In our cohort, 208/550 (38%) were diagnosed with complex appendicitis according to the gold standard. Clinical prediction rules with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve >0.7 were: Gorter (0.81), Bogaard (0.79), Bröker (0.79), Graham (0.77), Hansson (0.76), BADCF (0.76), and Eddama (0.75).

CONCLUSION

In this study, clinical prediction rules consisting of a combination of clinical and objective variables had the highest discriminative ability. External validation showed that 7 clinical prediction rules were potentially useful. Integration of these clinical prediction rules in daily practice is proposed to guide decision making regarding treatment strategies.

Low-Dose Abdominal CT for Evaluating Suspected Appendicitis in Adolescents and Young Adults: Review of Evidence

Due to its excellent diagnostic performance, CT is the mainstay of diagnostic test in adults with suspected acute appendicitis in many countries. Although debatable, extensive epidemiological studies have suggested that CT radiation is carcinogenic, at least in children and adolescents. Setting aside the debate over the carcinogenic risk of CT radiation, the value of judicious use of CT radiation cannot be overstated for the diagnosis of appendicitis, considering that appendicitis is a very common disease, and that the vast majority of patients with suspected acute appendicitis are adolescents and young adults with average life expectancies. Given the accumulated evidence justifying the use of low-dose CT (LDCT) of only 2 mSv, there is no reasonable basis to insist on using radiation dose of multi-purpose abdominal CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis, particularly in adolescents and young adults. Published data strongly suggest that LDCT is comparable to conventional dose CT in terms of clinical outcomes and diagnostic performance. In this narrative review, we will discuss such evidence for reducing CT radiation in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis.

The management of appendicular abscesses in a Tunisian Tertiary Care Hospital

Background

This study aims to describe the epidemiological, clinical, and radiological features of appendicular abscesses, compare the different approaches, and assess the safety and utility of laparoscopy in its management.

Methods

This descriptive retrospective study was carried out over 3 years extending from January 2017 to December 2019, reporting 150 appendicular abscesses cases. Data were collected from the register of the general surgery department B of the Rabta hospital. Cases with appendicular abscess were included. Files concerning patients with early appendicitis, non-appendicular abscesses or generalized appendicular peritonitis were excluded. Data were analysed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. In univariate analysis, we used the chi² test, the Fischer test, the Student t test. The factors retained by the univariate analysis were introduced into a logistic regression model. The significance level was set to 0.05.

Results

The mean age was 40.51 years. The gender ratio in patients with appendicular abscesses was M:F 1.94:1. Pain in the right iliac fossa associated with fever was the most common symptom (78% of cases). Clinical examination showed tenderness in the right iliac fossa in 38% of cases, rebound and guarding were found in 77 patients (51.3%), and a palpable mass was noted in 4 cases (4.2%). Imaging was done to confirm diagnosis; 46 patients underwent ultrasonogram and this confirmed the diagnosis in 26 patients (56%), while among the 71 patients who underwent CT abdomen confirmatory diagnosis was made in 65 patients (91.55%). An appendectomy was performed in 148 patients (98.6%) via laparoscopic approach in 94 patients, open Mac burney procedure in 32 cases (21.3%) and midline incision in 24 cases (16%). Two patients had an ileocecal resection. The appendix was most commonly located retrocecally (55.3%) in our cohort. The laparoscopic approach was performed in 94 patients (62.6%), and we had to convert in 44 patients due to dissection difficulties (46.8%). Among patients who underwent laparascopic approach 7 had developed peritonitis.. There were only 2 deaths. The mortality rate was 0,013%. The median duration of outpatient followup was 6 months (4–24 weeks) and was uneventful.

Conclusion

Appendicular abscess is a disease of young adults more common in men. Location of the appendix in our case series was mostly retroceacal. Laparoscopy was associated with good outcomes; peritonitis was uncommon and mortality was rare. The laparoscopic approach is a safe surgical technique for treating appendicular abscess and it can be considered as the routine approach for this condition In developing countries with limited technical resources, laparoscopy guarantees the absence of recurrence, reduces healthcare costs and decreases the risk of treating a severe disease conservatively.

Diagnostic accuracy using low-dose versus standard radiation dose CT in suspected acute appendicitis: prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced CT is the reference standard used in diagnostic imaging for acute appendicitis in adults. The radiation dose has been of concern. This study aimed to assess whether a lower radiation dose would affect the diagnostic accuracy of CT.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-centre cohort study of patients (aged over 16 years) with suspected appendicitis evaluated for enrolment in concurrent APPAC II-III trials. The diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced low- and standard-dose CT was compared with study protocols guiding imaging based on BMI; this enabled direct CT imaging comparison only in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2. The on-call CT diagnosis was compared with the final clinical diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among all 856 patients investigated, the accuracy of low-dose (454 patients) and standard-dose (402 patients) CT in identifying patients with and without appendicitis was 98·0 and 98·5 per cent respectively. In patients with a BMI under 30 kg/m2, respective values were 98·2 per cent (434 patients) and 98·6 per cent (210 patients) (P = 1·000). The corresponding accuracy for differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis was 90·3 and 87·6 per cent in all patients, and 89·8 and 88·4 per cent respectively among those with a BMI below 30 kg/m2 (P = 0·663). The median radiation dose in the whole low- and standard-dose CT groups was 3 and 7 mSv respectively. In the group with BMI below 30 kg/m2, corresponding median doses were 3 and 5 mSv (P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

Low- and standard-dose CT were accurate both in identifying appendicitis and in differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. Low-dose CT was associated with a significant radiation dose reduction, suggesting that it should be standard clinical practice at least in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2.

Classification of acute appendicitis (CAA): treatment directed new classification based on imaging (ultrasound, computed tomography) and pathology

PURPOSE

Acute appendicitis (AA) is amongst the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. In spite of progress based on risk stratifications, "negative" appendectomies are performed in up to 30% of patients whilst the appendix perforates in others. Preoperative classification of AA based on imaging is therefore recommended. The aim was to classify AA based on imaging (ultrasound/US, computed tomography/CT), surgical pathology, and/or histopathology in order to differentiate between complicated and uncomplicated AA. A new classification of acute appendicitis (CAA) shall be illustrated by typical US and CT images and be employed in a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Any study after 1970, which investigated clinical scores, pathology, US, CT, magnetic resonance imaging, and treatment of AA, was included. Typical images were taken from the author's image database.

RESULTS

Five main types of AA are defined, normal appendix (type 0), nonvisualised appendix (type X), uncomplicated AA (type 1), complicated AA without perforation (type 2), and complicated AA with perforation (type 3). The imaging modality is indicated by an additional letter, e.g., type p3b for free perforation on pathology. Standardised reporting of the appendix evaluation by US and CT is presented, as well as algorithms for AA management. Imaging features indicating imminent perforation, as well as likely recurrence, were both classified as complicated AA.

CONCLUSION

Imaging is mandatory in suspected AA. The CAA clearly separates uncomplicated from complicated forms of AA allowing nonoperative management in selected patients with uncomplicated forms of AA.

Clinical Prediction Score for Ruptured Appendicitis in ED

Background

Ruptured appendicitis has a high morbidity and mortality and requires immediate surgery. The Alvarado Score is used as a tool to predict the risk of acute appendicitis, but there is no such score for predicting rupture. This study aimed to develop the prediction score to determine the likelihood of ruptured appendicitis in an Asian population.

Methods

This study was a diagnostic, retrospective cross-sectional study in the Emergency Medicine Department of Ramathibodi Hospital between March 2016 and March 2018. The inclusion criteria were age >15 years and an available pathology report after appendectomy. Clinical factors included gender, age>60 years, right lower quadrant pain, migratory pain, nausea and/or vomiting, diarrhea, anorexia, fever>37.3°C, rebound tenderness, guarding, white blood cell count, polymorphonuclear white blood cells (PMN) > 75%, and pain duration before presentation. The predictive model and prediction score for ruptured appendicitis were developed by multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Result

During the study period, 480 patients met the inclusion criteria; of these, 77 (16%) had ruptured appendicitis. Five independent factors were predictive of rupture, age>60 years, fever>37.3°C, guarding, PMN>75%, and duration of pain>24 hours to presentation. A score >6 increased the likelihood ratio of ruptured appendicitis by 3.88 times.

Conclusion

Using the Ramathibodi Welawat Ruptured Appendicitis Score (RAMA WeRA Score) developed in this study, a score of >6 was associated with ruptured appendicitis.

Inflammatory Markers and Duration of Symptoms Have a Close Connection With Diagnosis and Staging of Acute Appendicitis in Children

Background: For children with acute appendicitis (AA), a clear diagnosis is a challenge. The purpose of this study is to explore whether inflammatory markers in the blood combined with symptom duration are helpful in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and in predicting the severity of acute appendicitis. Methods: All the selected patients underwent appendectomy between November 10, 2011 and November 15, 2019, in whom preoperative WBCC, CRP, and NE% had been measured in a short time. All patients were divided into two groups: uncomplicated AA and complicated AA, postoperatively. Results: For our standards, 813 patients were selected, 442 of them had complicated AA. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] age for the uncomplicated AA group was 9.78 ± 2.02 years and for the complicated AA group was 9.69 ± 2.16 years (P = 0.55). Elevated WBCC, CRP, and NE% had a higher relatively sensitivity in complicated AA than uncomplicated AA especially when WBCC, CRP, and NE% were at normal levels, which had a sensitivity of 100% in uncomplicated AA, but this only applied to nine patients. CRP values were significantly different in three time groups, whether uncomplicated or complicated AA. Conclusion: The combination of WBCC, CRP, and NE% values is very sensitive for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, and when we predict complicated AA using the CRP value, we also need to consider the time of symptom onset.

Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using a needle-type grasping forceps for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children: Case series

•

Acute appendicitis is the most common between the ages of 10 and 20 years.

•

Our centre performed a new technology of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using a needle-type grasping forceps (SLAN).

•

SLAN has advantages of favourable cosmetic results, minimal trauma, and enhanced postoperative recovery.

Introduction

Single-port laparoscopy has been used in any areas of surgery, including appendectomy, to reduce the operative stress and enhance postoperative recovery procedure. This paper introduces our attempt to perform single-port laparoscopic appendectomy using conventional laparoscoopic instruments and a needle-type grasping forceps (SLAN), which has dominant advantage in cosmetic appearance.

Methods

We report six pediatric patients who underwent SLAN for uncomplicated appendicitis from April to November 2019. SLAN was performed transumbilically, while conventional laparoscopic instruments and needle-type grasping forceps were both used. After routine intracorporeal appendectomy was completed, the pathological appendix was extracted through the single-port site, while a 10 mm trocar was used to avoid incision infectious. Clinical data and postoperative follow-up data were collected and analyzed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes of this novel technique.

Results

SLAN was successfully performed in all six pediatric patients. The median operative time, first exhaust time after surgery, pain score of postoperative day 1, and postoperative hospital stay were 69 (range, 50−85) min, 1.33 (range, 1–2) d, 0.83 (range, 0–3) score, 1.5 (range, 1–2) d, respectively. Neither intraoperative nor postoperative complications were noted, while no incision infectious, adhesive intestinal obstruction, and abdominal abscess were observed with 2–9 months follow up.

Discussion

Though there are many methods to perform single-port laparoscopic appendectomy, the use of needle grasping forceps in laparoscopic appendectomy has been confirmed a new choice for uncomplicated appendicitis in children.

Conclusion

SLAN is a feasible and safe technique to treat acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children. To be emphasized, surgeons must strictly grasp the indications for this surgery.

Consensus Statement of the Italian Polispecialistic Society of Young Surgeons (SPIGC): Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Background: Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common causes of abdominal pain requiring surgical intervention. Approximately 20% of AA cases are characterized by complications such as gangrene, abscesses, perforation, or diffuse peritonitis, which increase patients' morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis of AA can be difficult, and evaluation of clinical signs, laboratory index and imaging should be part of the management of patients with suspicion of AA.Methods: This consensus statement was written in relation to the most recent evidence for diagnosis and treatment of AA, performing a literature review on the most largely adopted scientific sources. The members of the SPIGC (Italian Polispecialistic Society of Young Surgeons) worked jointly to draft it. The recommendations were defined and graded based on the current levels of evidence and in accordance with the criteria adopted by the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) for the strength of the recommendations.Results: Fever and migratory pain tend to be present in patients with suspicion of AA. Laboratory and radiological examinations are commonly employed in the clinical practice, but today also scoring systems based on clinical signs and laboratory data have slowly been adopted for diagnostic purpose. The clinical presentation of AA in children, pregnant and elderly patients can be unusual, leading to more difficult and delayed diagnosis. Surgery is the best option in case of complicated AA, whereas it is not mandatory in case of uncomplicated AA. Laparoscopic surgical treatment is feasible and recommended. Postoperative antibiotic treatment is recommended only in patients with complicated AA.

Is postponed laparoscopic appendectomy justified for patients with acute appendicitis?

INTRODUCTION

Recent meta-analyses revealed that laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is a feasible procedure even for patients with complicated appendicitis. More than a few patients with acute appendicitis arrive at the hospital during night shifts and have their operation postponed for various reasons. However, the feasibility and disadvantages of this so-called "postponed laparoscopic appendectomy" (PLA) remain controversial.

METHODS

We included 149 patients who underwent LA for acute appendicitis within 48 h of diagnosis between January 2013 and May 2018. Patients were divided into an immediate LA group (patients who underwent LA within 4 h of diagnosis, n = 84) and a PLA group (patients who underwent LA 4-48 h after diagnosis, n = 65). Comparisons were made between these groups.

RESULTS

The preoperative characteristics of the patients in the immediate LA and PLA groups were not significantly different. Operative time was significantly longer in the PLA group than in the LA group (92.5 ± 40.8 vs 78.1 ± 29.7 min, P = 0.012). The incidence of postoperative complications (grade II or higher) was significantly greater in the PLA group than in the LA group (32.3% vs 17.8%, P = 0.041). Multivariate analysis revealed that a preoperative CT finding of periappendiceal fluid (P = 0.005, odds ratio = 4.71) and surgery 4-48 h after diagnosis (P = 0.005, odds ratio = 4.425) were independent risk factors of postoperative complications (grade II or higher).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with acute appendicitis, surgeons should perform immediate LA, if that is the patient's preferred surgical treatment, as long as there is no special reason to postpone surgery.

Appendicolith appendicitis is clinically complicated acute appendicitis-is it histopathologically different from uncomplicated acute appendicitis

PURPOSE

Acute appendicitis may present as uncomplicated and complicated and these disease forms differ both epidemiologically and clinically. Complicated acute appendicitis has traditionally been defined as an appendicitis complicated by perforation or a periappendicular abscess, and an appendicolith represents a predisposing factor of complicated disease. There are histopathological differences between uncomplicated acute appendicitis and the previously established traditional forms of complicated acute appendicitis, but to our knowledge, the histopathological differences between uncomplicated acute appendicitis and complicated acute appendicitis presenting with an appendicolith have not yet been reported. The study purpose was to assess these differences with two prospective patient cohorts: (1) computed tomography (CT) confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis patients enrolled in the surgical treatment arm of the randomized APPAC trial comparing appendectomy with antibiotics for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis and (2) patients with CT-verified acute appendicitis presenting with an appendicolith excluded from the APPAC trial.

METHODS

The following histopathological parameters were assessed: appendiceal diameter, depth of inflammation, micro-abscesses, density of eosinophils, and neutrophils in appendiceal wall and surface epithelium degeneration.

RESULTS

Using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, gender, and symptom duration, statistically significant differences were detected in the depth of inflammation ≤ 2.8 mm (adjusted OR 2.18 (95%CI: 1.29-3.71, p = 0.004), micro-abscesses (adjusted OR 2.16 (95%CI: 1.22-3.83, p = 0.008), the number of eosinophils and neutrophils ≥ 150/mm² (adjusted OR 0.97 (95%CI: 0.95-0.99, p = 0.013), adjusted OR 3.04 (95%CI: 1.82-5.09, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

These results corroborate the known clinical association of an appendicolith to complicated acute appendicitis.

GI Surgical Emergencies: Scope and Burden of Disease

Nearly 3 million patients are hospitalized every year for emergent gastrointestinal (GI) surgical problems and nearly one third of those will require surgery. This article reviews the scope of GI surgical emergencies within the context of emergency general surgery (EGS), costs of care, overview of several common GI surgical problems, and traditional and emerging treatment modalities. This article also argues for ongoing work in the area of risk assessment for EGS, and describes quality metrics as well as outcomes of care for these patients.

Association of postoperative organ space infection after intraoperative irrigation in appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of intraoperative irrigation on postoperative abscess rates compared to suction alone is unclear. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grading system provides distinct disease severity stratification to determine if prior analyses were biased by anatomic severity. We hypothesized that for increasing appendicitis severity, patients receiving (high, ≥2 L) intraoperative irrigation would have increased postoperative organ space infection (OSI) rate compared to (low, <2 L) irrigation.

METHODS

Single-institution review of adults (>18 years) undergoing appendectomy for appendicitis during 2010-2016. Demographics, operative details, irrigation volumes, duration of stay, and complications (Clavien-Dindo classification) were collected. American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grades were assigned by two independent reviewers based on operative findings. Summary, univariate, and area under the receiver operating curve analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 1187) were identified with a mean (SD) age of 41.6 (18.4) years (45% female). Operative approach included laparoscopy (n = 1122 [94.5%]), McBurney incision (n = 10 [0.8%]), midline laparotomy (n = 16 [1.3 %]), and laparoscopy converted to laparotomy (n = 39 [3.4%)]. The mean (SD) volume of intraoperative irrigation was 410 (1200) mL. Complication rate was 26.1%. Median volume of intraoperative irrigation in patients who developed postoperative OSI was 3 [0-4] compared to 0 [0-0] in those without infection (p < 0.0001). Area under the receiver operating curve analysis determined that 2 or more liters of irrigation was associated with postoperative OSI (c statistic: 0.83, 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.89; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Irrigation is used for increasingly severe appendicitis with wide variation. Irrigation volumes of 2 L or greater are associated with postoperative OSI. Improving standardization of irrigation volume (<2 L) may prevent morbidity associated with this high-volume disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Are Preoperative CT Findings Useful for Predicting Postoperative Intraabdominal Abscess in the Patients with Acute Appendicitis?

Background and objective: In patients with acute appendicitis (AA), preoperative computed tomography (CT) findings suggesting development of intraabdominal abscess (IAA) had not been widely used. The aim of this study was to investigate the preoperative clinical and radiological factors that predict the development of a postoperative IAA in patients with AA who were treated by laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). Methods: Two hundred and sixteen patients with pathologically proven AA underwent LA between January 2013 and March 2018 in our department. Medical records and preoperative CT images of these 216 patients were retrospectively reviewed and the predictive factors of postoperative IAA were investigated. In addition, patients were divided into complicated appendicitis (CA) and simple appendicitis (SA) and perioperative factors of two groups were compared. Results: One hundred and forty-seven patients were diagnosed with CA, while the other 69 patients were diagnosed with SA. Sixteen patients developed postoperative IAA in the CA group, while no patients in the SA group did. The univariate analysis revealed that time from onset to surgery more than 3 days (p = 0.011), the preoperative CT finding of periappendiceal fluid (p = 0.003), abscess (p < 0.001), and free air (p < 0.001), operation time more than 120 min (p = 0.023) and placement of a drainage tube (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the development of IAA. Multivariate analysis revealed that the preoperative CT finding of free air was independently associated with the development of IAA (p = 0.007, odds ratio = 5.427, 95% CI: 1.586⁻18.57). Conclusions: IAA developed predominantly in patients with CA. Preoperative CT findings of free air was found to be an independent predictor for the development of IAA. Surgeons should be meticulous in managing the postoperative course of patients with this finding.

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

PURPOSE

Appendiceal tumors are rare, but high neoplasm rates have been reported at interval appendectomy after periappendicular abscess. Non-operative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis has shown promising results. The data on appendiceal tumor incidence and presentation among acute appendicitis patients is limited, especially in patient cohorts differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. Objective was to assess appendiceal tumor incidence and tumor association to appendicitis in patients with uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This nationwide population-based registry study was conducted from 2007 to 2013. The Finnish Cancer Registry and the National Institute for Health Registry were used to combine data on all appendiceal tumors and acute appendicitis diagnosis with medical reports evaluated at eight study hospitals.

RESULTS

Altogether, 840 appendiceal tumors were identified, and out of these, 504 patient reports were reviewed, including 472 patients in this study. Tumor was diagnosed at appendectomy for suspected acute appendicitis in 276 patients (58%). In the whole study, histologically acute appendicitis and tumor were both present in 53% (n = 250), and out of these, 41% (n = 102) were complicated and 59% (n = 148) uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The associated tumor risk was significantly higher in complicated acute appendicitis compared with uncomplicated cases (3.24% vs. 0.87%, p < 0.001). Overall tumor prevalence among acute appendicitis patients was 1.24%.

CONCLUSIONS

Appendiceal tumor prevalence in acute appendicitis was low. Tumor risk was significantly higher in complicated acute appendicitis compared with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The risk of missed appendiceal tumors related to antibiotic therapy of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is very low.

Optimising the antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a protocol for a multicentre randomised clinical trial (APPAC II trial)

BACKGROUND

Based on epidemiological and clinical data acute appendicitis can present either as uncomplicated (70-80%) or complicated (20-30%) disease. Recent studies have shown that antibiotic therapy is both safe and cost-effective for a CT-scan confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. However, based on the study protocols to ensure patient safety, these randomised studies used mainly broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics requiring additional hospital resources and prolonged hospital stay. As we now know that antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis is feasible and safe, further studies evaluating optimisation of the antibiotic treatment regarding both antibiotic spectrum and shorter hospital stay are needed to evaluate antibiotics as the first-line treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

APPAC II trial is a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing per oral (p.o.) antibiotic monotherapy with intravenous (i.v.) antibiotic therapy followed by p.o. antibiotics in the treatment of CT-scan confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Adult patients with CT-scan diagnosed uncomplicated acute appendicitis will be enrolled in nine Finnish hospitals. The intended sample size is 552 patients. Primary endpoint is the success of the randomised treatment, defined as resolution of acute appendicitis resulting in discharge from the hospital without the need for surgical intervention and no recurrent appendicitis during one-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints include post-intervention complications, late recurrence of acute appendicitis after one year, duration of hospital stay, pain, quality of life, sick leave and treatment costs. Primary endpoint will be evaluated in two stages: point estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) will be calculated for both groups and proportion difference between groups with 95% CI will be calculated and evaluated based on 6 percentage point non-inferiority margin.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, APPAC II trial is the first randomised controlled trial comparing per oral antibiotic monotherapy with intravenous antibiotic therapy continued by per oral antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The APPAC II trial aims to add clinical evidence on the debated role of antibiotics as the first-line treatment for a CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis as well as to optimise the non-operative treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03236961, retrospectively registered on the 2nd of August 2017.

Complicated appendicitis and considerations for interval appendectomy

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Of the 300,000 appendectomies performed each year, 25% are due to complicated appendicitis. This article reviews the incidence and pathophysiology of acute appendicitis, the nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis, and the rationales for and against interval appendectomy.

A randomised placebo-controlled double-blind multicentre trial comparing antibiotic therapy with placebo in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: APPAC III trial study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies show that antibiotic therapy is safe and feasible for CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Spontaneous resolution of acute appendicitis has already been observed over a hundred years ago. In CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute diverticulitis (left-sided appendicitis), studies have shown no benefit from antibiotics compared with symptomatic treatment, but this shift from antibiotics to symptomatic treatment has not yet been widely implemented in clinical practice. Recently, symptomatic treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been demonstrated in a Korean open-label study. However, a double-blinded placebo-controlled study to illustrate the role of antibiotics and spontaneous resolution of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is still lacking.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The APPAC III (APPendicitis ACuta III) trial is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority randomised study comparing antibiotic therapy with placebo in the treatment CT scan-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis aiming to evaluate the role of antibiotics in the resolution of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Adult patients (18-60 years) with CT scan-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis (the absence of appendicolith, abscess, perforation and tumour) will be enrolled in five Finnish university hospitals.Primary endpoint is success of the randomised treatment, defined as resolution of acute appendicitis resulting in discharge from the hospital without surgical intervention within 10 days after initiating randomised treatment (treatment efficacy). Secondary endpoints include postintervention complications, recurrent symptoms after treatment up to 1 year, late recurrence of acute appendicitis after 1 year, duration of hospital stay, sick leave, treatment costs and quality of life. A decrease of 15 percentage points in success rate is considered clinically important difference. The superiority of antibiotic treatment compared with placebo will be analysed using Fisher's one-sided test and CI will be calculated for proportion difference.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Turku University Hospital and the Finnish Medicines Agency (FIMEA). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03234296; Pre-results.

Operative versus non-operative therapy for acute phlegmon of the appendix: Is it safer? A case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

There is no clear standardized approach to complicated appendicitis associated with abscess or phlegmon, with treatment varying from immediate appendectomy versus non-operative management with antibiotics and possible interval appendectomy. This case report reviews a presentation of complicated appendicitis failing non-operative therapy and reviews the literature on complicated appendicitis.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 19 year-old male presented with right lower quadrant pain, leukocytosis, and fever. He had been seen at an outside hospital, diagnosed with complicated appendicitis, treated non-operatively, and discharged on antibiotics. CT confirmed persistent complicated appendicitis; he was again treated non-operatively with resolution of symptoms. He was discharged but returned with recurrent pain/leukocytosis. The patient was determined to have failed non-operative management, underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Post-operatively he improved was doing well in follow up.

DISCUSSION

Historically, the therapy for acute appendicitis has been surgical. However, immediate surgical management of complicated appendicitis is often associated with increased complications. Non-operative management with antibiotics and interval appendectomy in cases of complicated appendicitis is an option. Literature shows that non-operative management of complicated appendicitis is not entirely innocuous. Non-operative management carries a significant failure rate. Patients that undergo immediate appendectomy may have a better health-related quality of life. Non-operative management of complicated appendicitis may lead to worse outcomes and higher healthcare costs.

CONCLUSION

Non-operative management of complicated appendicitis has significant failure rates, increased healthcare costs, and perhaps increased morbidity when compared to immediate surgical management. Immediate surgical management of complicated appendicitis remains the gold standard and should be used in most patients.

Diagnostic prediction of complicated appendicitis by combined clinical and radiological appendicitis severity index (APSI)

OBJECTIVES

To develop a routinely applicable severity index for the management of acute appendicitis in adults using combined clinical and radiological parameters and retroperitoneal space planes (RSP).

METHODS

Two hundred consecutive patients with histologically proven acute appendicitis and available presurgical CT scans were analysed retrospectively. Two radiologists assessed all CT scans for morphologic sings of appendicitis and six RSP. Clinical parameters were age, body temperature, C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count, and duration of symptoms. Radiological parameters were appendix diameter and wall thickness, periappendiceal fat stranding and fluid, intraluminal and extraluminal air, thinning of appendiceal wall, caecal wall thickening, appendicolith and abscess formation.

RESULTS

One hundred and three patients (51%) had histologically proven complicated appendicitis. Based on three clinical (age ≥52 years, body temperature ≥37.5°C, duration of symptoms ≥48 h) and four computed tomography (CT) findings (appendix diameter ≥14 mm, presence of periappendiceal fluid, extraluminal air, perityphlitic abscess), the APSI was developed using regression coefficients of multivariate logistic regression analyses with a maximum of 10 points. A score of ≥4 points predicted complicated appendicitis with a positive predictive value of 92% and a negative predictive value of 83%. Substantial to excellent interobserver agreement was found for the four radiological parameters of the APSI [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 0.78-0.83]. The RSP evaluation presented no added value for the diagnosis of complicated appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Using APSI, an accurate and simple prediction of complicated appendicitis in adults was possible. The RSP count was not useful for the diagnosis of complicated appendicitis.

KEY POINTS

• Appendicitis severity score provides an accurate and simple prediction of complicated appendicitis • Appendicitis severity score ≥4 accurately predicted complicated appendicitis (PPV 92%;NPV 83%) • Evaluation of retroperitoneal space planes was not useful in diagnosing complicated appendicitis.

Increased anatomic severity predicts outcomes: Validation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma's Emergency General Surgery score in appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Determination and reporting of disease severity in emergency general surgery lacks standardization. Recently, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) proposed an anatomic severity grading system. We aimed to validate this system in patients with appendicitis and determine if cross-sectional imaging correlates with disease severity at operation.

METHODS

Patients 18 years or older undergoing treatment for acute appendicitis between 2013 and 2015 were identified. Baseline demographics, procedure types were recorded, and AAST grades were assigned based on intraoperative and radiologic findings. Outcomes including length of stay, 30-day mortality, and complications based on Clavien-Dindo categories and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program variables. Summary statistical univariate, nominal logistic, and standard least squares analyses were performed comparing AAST grade with key outcomes. Bland-Altman analysis compared operative findings with preoperative cross-sectional imaging to compare assigning grades.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-four patients with mean (±SD) age of 39.3 years (±16.5) were included (53% men), and all patients had cross-sectional imaging. Two hundred ninety-nine underwent appendectomy, and 85% completed laparoscopic. Thirty-day mortality rate was 0.9%, complication rate was 21%. Increased (median [interquartile range, IQR]) AAST grade was recorded in patients with complications (2 [1-4]) compared with those without (1 [1-1], p = 0.001). For operative management, (median [IQR]) AAST grades were significantly associated with procedure type: laparoscopic (1 [1-1]), open (4 [2-5]), conversion to open (3 [1-4], p = 0.001). Increased (median [IQR]) AAST grades were significantly associated in nonoperative management: patients having a complication had a higher median AAST grade (4 [3-5]) compared with those without (3 [2-3], p = 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis comparing AAST grade and cross-sectional imaging demonstrated no difference (-0.02 ± 0.02; p = 0.2; coefficient of repeatability 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The AAST grading system is valid in our population. Increased AAST grade is associated with open procedures, complications, and length of stay. The AAST emergency general surgery grade determined by preoperative imaging strongly correlated to operative findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiologic/prognostic study, level III.

Second date appendectomy: Operating for failure of nonoperative treatment in perforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis is embraced by many surgical teams, driven by low to moderate quality randomized studies that support noninferiority of antibiotics versus appendectomy for treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Several flaws of these studies have emerged, especially in the recruitment strategy and in the diagnostic criteria that were used. The growing confidence given to antibiotics, together with the lack of reliable criteria to distinguish between uncomplicated and perforated appendicitis, exposes patients with perforated appendicitis to the likelihood to be treated with antibiotics instead of surgery. Among them, those patients who experience a temporary relief of symptoms due to antibiotics, followed by early recurrence of disease when antibiotics are discontinued, are likely to undergo appendectomy at their second date. Second date appendectomy, i.e. the removal of the appendix when acute inflammation relapses within the scar of a previously unhealed perforated appendicitis, is the unwanted child of the nonoperative treatment and a new challenge for both the surgeon and the patient.

METHODS

Between June and July 2016, two patients were readmitted and operated for failure of nonoperative treatment with antibiotics.

RESULTS

A video is presented, which focuses on the different anatomic presentation and technical challenges between prompt and second date laparoscopic appendectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

When proposing nonoperative treatment for acute appendicitis, surgeons should be aware and inform their patients that if the appendix is perforated and an incomplete healing and early recurrence occur, a second date appendectomy could be a more challenging operation compared to a prompt appendectomy.