A five-year longitudinal observational study in morbidity and mortality of negative appendectomy in Sulaimani teaching Hospital/Kurdistan Region/Iraq

Nationwide prospective audit for the evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults: right iliac fossa treatment (RIFT)-Turkey

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most prevalent surgical emergency. The negative appendicectomy rate and diagnostic uncertainty are important concerns. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of current appendicitis risk prediction models in patients with acute right iliac fossa pain.

METHODS

A nationwide prospective observational study was conducted, including all consecutive adult patients who presented with right iliac fossa pain. Diagnostic, clinical and negative appendicectomy rate data were recorded. The Alvarado score, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR), Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and Adult Appendicitis Score systems were calculated with collected data to classify patients into risk categories. Diagnostic value and categorization performance were evaluated, with use of risk category-based metrics including 'true positive rate' (percentage of appendicitis patients in the highest risk category), 'failure rate' (percentage of patients with appendicitis in the lowest risk category) and 'categorization resolution' (true positive rate/failure rate).

RESULTS

A total of 3358 patients from 84 centres were included. Female patients were less likely to undergo surgery than men (71.5% versus 82.5% respectively; relative risk 0.866, 95% c.i. 0.834 to 0.901, P < 0.001); with a three-fold higher negative appendicectomy rate (11.3% versus 4.1% respectively; relative risk 2.744, 95% c.i. 2.047 to 3.677, P < 0.001). Ultrasonography was utilized in 56.8% and computed tomography in 75.2% of all patients. The Adult Appendicitis Score had the best diagnostic performance for the whole population; however, only RIPASA was significant in men. All scoring systems were successful in females patients, but Adult Appendicitis Score had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value. The RIPASA and the Adult Appendicitis Score had the best categorization resolution values, complemented by their exceedingly low failure rates in both male and female patients. Alvarado and AIR had extremely high failure rates in men.

CONCLUSION

The negative appendicectomy rate was low overall, but women had an almost three-fold higher negative appendicectomy rate despite lower likelihood to undergo surgery. The overuse of imaging tests, best exemplified by the 75.2% frequency of patients undergoing computed tomography, may lead to increased costs. Risk-scoring systems such as RIPASA and Adult Appendicitis Score appear to be superior to Alvarado and AIR.

SpyGlass/Cholangioscope-Assisted Colonoscopic Removal of Appendicolith as a Nonsurgical Alternative for Stump Appendicitis Management

An appendicolith is a calcified mass which can obstruct the appendix often leading to recurrent appendicitis. Failure to extract fecalith at the time of appendectomy can lead to recurrent inflammation in the appendiceal stump. We describe a 28-year-old man with stump appendicitis due to a retained fecalith postappendectomy. Our approach, akin to interval appendectomy, combines antibiotics and endoscopic intervention postinfection resolution. This case highlights the feasibility and safety of endoscopic management, offering a nonsurgical alternative to prevent the morbidity associated with revision surgery. Further exploration of nonsurgical modalities is warranted to optimize patient outcomes.

Sex Differences in Appendicitis: A Systematic Review

Appendicitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal conditions a person can develop. Throughout the years of assessing the different focuses of appendicitis, such as origin, symptoms, labs, diagnosis, treatment, and complications, there have been mere mentions of sex differences. One of the most known sex differences in appendicitis is the fact that males are significantly more likely to develop appendicitis compared to females. Another postulated difference is that males may be more likely to develop a perforated appendix. These differences significantly affect the various aspects of diagnosing and treating appendicitis and may even influence the outcome of appendicitis. Sex difference analysis of conditions has been widely researched over the last two decades, and sex can influence and impact conditions from initial presentation to the outcome of treatment. This paper evaluates the sex differences in appendicitis concerning incidence, risk factors, symptoms, diagnosis technique, treatment, and outcomes across ages. Following PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review reviewed PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest databases for articles pertaining to sex differences in appendicitis. The original article count was 21,121, which was narrowed down to 28 publications. It was found that, as previously described, males had a significantly higher rate of appendicitis, as well as were at significant risk of perforated appendicitis. No official risk factors were found to differ between the sexes, but males were more likely to complain of symptoms like right lower quadrant cramps/tenderness/pain and loss of appetite. Scores such as the pediatric appendicitis score (PAS) and Ohmann have been used to diagnose appendicitis, but the PAS was significantly more accurate for females, and the Ohmann resulted in significantly fewer negative appendectomies in females as well. Ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) are still the gold standards for diagnosis; however, while time to CT was significantly delayed in females, they were more likely to undergo extensive imaging, possibly to rule out other conditions. Males were more likely to undergo open appendectomies compared to females, who more frequently underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, yet females were more likely to experience complications. Further research should evaluate the influences that can predict postoperative outcomes following appendectomies between sexes and how to prevent/reduce their occurrence.

Complication analysis in acute appendicitis, results from an international multicenter study

PURPOSE

Acute appendicitis (AA) is frequent, its diagnosis is challenging, and the surgical intervention is not risk free. An accurate diagnosis will reduce unnecessary surgeries and associated risks. This study aimed to analyze the rate of appendectomies' postoperative complications.

METHODS

Multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted at three large hospitals (Pisa University Hospital, Italy; Henri Mondor University Hospital, Paris, France; and Valencia University Hospital, Spain).

RESULTS

A total of 3070 patients with a median age of 28 years (IQR 20-43) were enrolled. 1403 (45.7%) were females. Eight hundred ninety patients (29%) did not undergo preoperative imaging. Ultrasound and CT scans were performed in 1465 (47.7%) and 715 (23.3%) patients. Patients requiring CT scan were older [median 38 (IQR 26-53) vs. no imaging median 24 (IQR 16-35), Ultrasound median 28 (IQR 20-41); p < 0.0001]. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 58.6%. Complications developed in 1279 (41.7%) patients: Clavien-Dindo grades I-II in 1126 (33.9%); Clavien-Dindo grades III-IV in 146 (5.2%). Overall mortality was 0.2%. Following resection of a normal appendix, 15% experienced major complications (Clavien-Dindo grades IIIb and above). Multivariable analysis revealed that age, Charlson comorbidity index, histopathology, and Alvarado score over 7 were associated with a higher risk of Clavien-Dindo complication grades IIIa and higher.

CONCLUSION

Appendectomy may be associated with serious postoperative complications. Complications were associated with older age, Charlson comorbidity index, histopathology, and high Alvarado scores. The definition of accurate diagnostic and therapeutic pathways may improve results. The association between clinical scores and radiology is recommended.

Low-Value Surgical Procedures in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Scoping Review

Importance

Overuse of surgical procedures is increasing around the world and harms both individuals and health care systems by using resources that could otherwise be allocated to addressing the underuse of effective health care interventions. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is some limited country-specific evidence showing that overuse of surgical procedures is increasing, at least for certain procedures.

Objectives

To assess factors associated with, extent and consequences of, and potential solutions for low-value surgical procedures in LMICs.

Evidence Review

We searched 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Index Medicus) for studies published from database inception until April 27, 2022, with no restrictions on date or language. A combination of MeSH terms and free-text words about the overuse of surgical procedures was used. Studies examining the problem of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs were included and categorized by major focus: the extent of overuse, associated factors, consequences, and solutions.

Findings

Of 4276 unique records identified, 133 studies across 63 countries were included, reporting on more than 9.1 million surgical procedures (median per study, 894 [IQR, 97-4259]) and with more than 11.4 million participants (median per study, 989 [IQR, 257-6857]). Fourteen studies (10.5%) were multinational. Of the 119 studies (89.5%) originating from single countries, 69 (58.0%) were from upper-middle-income countries and 30 (25.2%) were from East Asia and the Pacific. Of the 42 studies (31.6%) reporting extent of overuse of surgical procedures, most (36 [85.7%]) reported on unnecessary cesarean delivery, with estimated rates in LMICs ranging from 12% to 81%. Evidence on other surgical procedures was limited and included abdominal and percutaneous cardiovascular surgical procedures. Consequences of low-value surgical procedures included harms and costs, such as an estimated US $3.29 billion annual cost of unnecessary cesarean deliveries in China. Associated factors included private financing, and solutions included social media campaigns and multifaceted interventions such as audits, feedback, and reminders.

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review found growing evidence of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs, which may generate significant harm and waste of limited resources; the majority of studies reporting overuse were about unnecessary cesarean delivery. Therefore, a better understanding of the problems in other surgical procedures and a robust evaluation of solutions are needed.

Oncological aspect of incidental appendectomy with regard to histopathological findings: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to describe the findings on histopathological examination of removed, macroscopically non-diseased, vermicular appendix during another primary surgical procedure (incidental appendectomy (IA)). Previous studies disapproved IA but were based on the possibility of complicated appendicitis. We observed the prevalence of neoplasms of the appendix in IA versus the appendectomy performed due to acute appendicitis (AA).

METHODS

The database of histopathology reports of the Surgery Department, University Hospital of Split was reviewed in the period from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. A total of 2832 histopathology reports were reviewed.

RESULTS

There was no difference in gender distribution between these two groups, but AA had a statistically significantly lower median patient age compared to the group IA (40 vs. 68 years; P < 0.001). In the AA group, there were 84.5% acute appendicitis, 11.1% normal appendiceal reports, 3.2% appendiceal neoplasms, and 1.2% other pathologies. The group IA had 89.5% normal findings of the appendix, 7.2% appendiceal neoplasms, and 0.5% other pathology. The difference in neoplasm prevalence between IA and AA groups was 4.0% (95%CI: 2.2 to 5.8), P < 0.001. The number of incidental appendectomies needed to detect one neoplasm of the appendix is 25.

CONCLUSION

Incidental appendectomies in patients undergoing abdominal surgery revealed a relatively high prevalence of appendiceal neoplasms above the age of 60 years. Prospective studies about incidental appendectomies, their clinical consequences, and impact on prognosis should be performed to define the value of incidental appendectomy in those patients.

Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Cross-sectional Study on Alvarado's Score from a Low Income Country

Background

Alvarado score is the most widely used scoring system for diagnosing acute appendicitis, globally. There have been concerns regarding the diagnostic accuracy of this score as it was shown to have lower sensitivity in certain populations like Blacks and Asians. Despite its wide clinical use in the Ethiopian set up, the diagnostic accuracy of this score remained largely unexamined in this population.

Methodology

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted and all adult patients who presented with right lower quadrant abdominal pain and evaluated with a clinical impression of acute appendicitis were enrolled in the study. Data was collected by trained surgical residents over a period of six months (August 2019- January 2020) and analysed using SPSS version 25.

Results

A total of 235 patients were enrolled in this study among whom two thirds were males. The majority of the study participants (61.7%) had an Alvarado score of ≥7 while almost a quarter of them had a score of <4. The mean Alvarado score in this study was 7 ± 1.8 whereas the median and the mode were 7 and 9 respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of Alvarado score were 99.1%, 55.6%, 98.2% and 62.5% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of this score was superior in males compared to females (99.3% vs 97.6% and 80% vs 25%). A score of ≥5 was found to have a sensitivity of 98.4%.

Conclusion

Alvarado score was found to have good sensitivity and positive predictive value in this study. A score of ≥5 can be used to "rule in" the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Hence, the use of Alvarado score's in the Ethiopian setup is to be encouraged.

To err is human; acute appendicitis a mistaken clinical identity for metastatic follicular thyroid carcinoma, a case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Thyroid cancer accounts for majority of endocrine cancers with follicular thyroid cancer the second most common. It tends to spread via hematogenous route with distant metastasis thus besides presenting as a neck mass it may also present with symptoms tallying to regions of metastasis which may misguide the diagnosis. We report a case of a 50-year-old man who presented with features of appendicitis only to discover metastatic right iliac bone follicular thyroid cancer. We describe our experience on diagnostic formulation, radiological work up, surgery, radioactive iodine therapy and follow up.

CASE PRESENTATION

50-year-old man presenting with acute abdomen and fevers with suspicion for appendicitis, worked up and found to have metastatic follicular carcinoma. Underwent total thyroidectomy and radioactive iodine therapy to achieve disease stability without progression with a 5 year follow up completed.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

The tendency to jump to medical imaging to establish a diagnosis in a lab oriented rather than clinical oriented approach. The role of radiology to establish the underlying disease and identify the primary lesion. Successfully halting disease progression for metastatic follicular thyroid carcinoma with surgery and radioactive iodine therapy.

CONCLUSION

Right iliac fossa tenderness does not always equate to acute appendicitis hence the use of diagnostic imaging to diagnose the metastatic lesion thus simplifying the puzzle to identify the primary. We hope through sharing our experience, we encourage the use of interventional radiology in a region that tends to opt for open approach when percutaneous approaches have shown to be successful.

Outcomes of the Macroscopically Normal Appendix Left in Situ in Patients with Suspected Appendicitis

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.

Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy versus laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a pilot study

Background

An increasing number of studies have shown the merits of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) in diagnosing and treating acute uncomplicated appendicitis. However, no related prospective controlled studies have been reported yet. Our aim is to assess the feasibility and safety of ERAT in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

Methods

In this open-label, randomized trial, participants were randomly allocated to the ERAT group, laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) group and open appendectomy (OA) group. The primary outcome was the clinical success rate of the treatment. Intention-to-treat analysis was used in the study.

Results

The study comprised of 99 patients, with 33 participants in each group. The clinical success rate was 87.88% (29/33), 96.97% (32/33) and 100% (33/33) in the ERAT, LA and OA group, respectively. In the ERAT group, 4 patients failed ERAT due to difficult cannulation. In LA group, 1 patient failed because of abdominal adhesion. There were no significant differences among the three treatment groups regarding the clinical success rate (P = 0.123). The median duration of follow-up was 22 months. There were no significant differences (P = 0.693) among the three groups in terms of adverse events and the final crossover rate of ERAT to surgery was 21.21% (7/33).

Conclusion

ERAT can serve as an alternative and efficient method to treat acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

Trial registration The study is registered with the WHO Primary Registry-Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900025812).

Two-Year Experiences of 500 Appendectomies in Lahore General Hospital, Lahore

Introduction

Acute appendicitis is a leading cause of abdominal conditions in emergency departments. Evidence from research studies has indicated the efficacies of surgical procedures involving appendectomies. However, in Pakistan, there is a paucity of information regarding the epidemiology, clinical presentations, and surgical management of acute appendicitis.

Objective

This paper aims to report the epidemiologic data and findings of surgical management of acute appendicitis in Lahore General Hospital (LGH). The data was based on our two-year experiences of appendectomies in the hospital.

Materials and methodology

Data were collected retrospectively. The patients underwent appendectomies performed by the team of surgeons of Surgical Unit 1 of LGH in the Accident and Emergency (A&E) Department from July 2019 to October 2021.

Results

The total number of patients was 506, and the mean age was 26.8. Males (67.29%) and young adults aged 18-34 years were at higher risk of appendicitis. Compared to other surgical procedures performed, open appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy operative times were significantly shorter. Histopathology of all the cases showed acute inflammation of the appendix.

Discussion

Similar to findings from other research studies, the operative time of open appendectomies was shorter (70.6 minutes) in the hospital than the operative time of laparoscopic appendectomies (77 minutes). However, the overall operative times were longer than the operative times reported in some other research studies. Also, contrary to other research findings, open appendectomy (1.22 days) was associated with a longer length of hospital stay than laparoscopic appendectomy (≈1 day). Simple acute appendicitis was the most predominant operation findings (289, 57.1%).

Conclusion

Compared to other hospitals, the shorter hospital stays/recovery time indicated the high surgical skill of performing open and laparoscopic appendectomies in Lahore General Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan.