Outpatient antibiotic use and the incidence of acute appendicitis in Finland: a nationwide study from 1990-2008

Incidence of acute diverticulitis compared to appendicitis in emergency wards: a 10-year nationwide register and cohort study from Finland

BACKGROUND

The two most common abdominal infections in emergency departments (ED) are acute appendicitis (AA) and sigmoid diverticulitis (AD). The frequency of ED visits for diverticulitis has increased strongly in many countries during recent decades. The aim of this study was to analyze the nationwide changes in AD rate requiring hospital admission compared to AA during a 10-year study period.

METHODS

Register data of AD and AA in the whole of Finland were obtained between the years 2009 and 2018. Changes in the incidence and surgical treatment of AD in the whole country were compared to those of AA. Patient demographics and treatment of AD were analyzed in greater detail from a smaller cohort (n = 614).

RESULTS

The incidence of AD increased from 262 to 413 cases (58%) per 100,000 inhabitants during 10 years and emergency surgery for AD decreased from 27 to 24 cases per 100,000 (11%). The incidence of AA remained stable and varied from 118 to 124 annual cases per 100,000 inhabitants. In a patient cohort of AD (n = 614), most of the patients (68%) had only one episode of diverticulitis during 10 years; 16% were operated urgently, with a mortality of 8%. Disease-specific mortality increased from 0% to 5.7% along with patient age when comparing the age groups <50 years and > 70 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that the incidence of acute diverticulitis is still increasing and is now 2-3 times higher than that of appendicitis in emergency departments.

Antibiotic treatment for appendicitis in Norway and Sweden: a nationwide survey on treatment practices

Background

Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdomen. Uncomplicated appendicitis is as an inflamed appendix without perforation, gangrene or abscess formation. Recent trials show that one can safely treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics, given patient approval and appropriate follow-up. A recent study has also indicated no difference between antibiotic treatment and placebo. Our aim was to investigate if Norwegian and Swedish surgical departments treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics and to explore their opinions on this treatment practice.

Methods

A questionnaire was distributed to all heads of department in hospitals that treat appendicitis in Norway and Sweden. Answers were collected using a REDCap survey. Answers were compared between centers and nations and the results were presented anonymously.

Results

We sent the questionnaire to 94 eligible recipients and received 61 (65%) answers. In total, 8/61 (13%) departments stated that they have established antibiotic treatment as sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Almost half of the responders stated that they have used antibiotics sporadically to treat uncomplicated appendicitis. Lack of evidence and guidelines were noted as reasons why antibiotic treatment has not been implemented as sole treatment.

Conclusions

Most Norwegian and Swedish departments have not implemented antibiotic treatment as the sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Despite several recent large trials on this subject, lack of evidence and guidelines was the most frequently reported reason in our survey.

Non-specific abdominal pain remains as the most common reason for acute abdomen: 26-year retrospective audit in one emergency unit

OBJECTIVE

Distribution of diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain (AAP) may change because of population aging, increased obesity, advanced diagnostic imaging and changes in nutritional habits. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnoses causing AAP during a 26-year period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional cohort study in one emergency department (ED) covering population about 250,000. All patients admitted to the ED in 1986, 2003 and 2012 were evaluated from hospital electronic database. Demographic data, utilization of diagnostic tests, surgical treatment and discharge diagnosis were analyzed. Statistical data of population aging, obesity and alcohol consumption during 1980-2012 were obtained from national registers.

RESULTS

The AAP patients represented 10-20% of our total ED census. The most common causes of AAP were nonspecific abdominal pain (NSAP, 31-37%), acute appendicitis (11-23%), biliary disease (9-11%), bowel obstruction (5-7%), acute pancreatitis (4-8%) and acute diverticulitis (1-7%). The percentage of NSAP remained highest throughout the study period. Decrease in the number of acute appendicitis (from 23 to 11%; p < .0001), increase in acute diverticulitis (from 1 to 5%; p ≤ .0001) and acute pancreatitis (from 4 to 7%; p = .0273) was observed over time. The utilization of diagnostic imaging increased significantly (CT from 2 to 37% and US from 4 to 38%, p < .0001). Hospital mortality was very low (1-2%).

CONCLUSIONS

NSAP is still the main differential diagnostic problem in the ED. Except acute appendicitis, distribution of specific diagnoses causing AAP remained rather stable through 26-year audit.

Incidence of appendicitis according to region of origin in first- and second-generation immigrants and adoptees in Sweden. A cohort follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Geographic variations in incidence of appendicitis and proportion of perforations suggest environmental or genetic etiological factors. We study incidence of appendicitis and proportion of perforations according to geographical origin in immigrants and international adoptees in Sweden.

METHODS

A cohort of 11,557,566 Swedish residents - 277,104 first- and 377,773 second-generation immigrants and 57,304 adoptees - was followed from 1988 till 2010. Differences in proportion of operation for perforated appendicitis and negative appendectomy and standardized incidence ratios (SIR) of perforated and non-perforated appendicitis associated with geographic origin was analyzed.

RESULTS

High incidence rates are seen in first- and second-generation immigrants from South America for perforated (SIR 1.58 and 1.81, respectively) and non-perforated appendicitis (SIR 1.18 and 1.22, respectively), and in adoptees from South America for non-perforated appendicitis (SIR 1.07). Low incidence rates are seen for perforated appendicitis in first-generation immigrants and adoptees from Asia (SIR 0.74 and 0.56, respectively), and for non-perforated appendicitis in immigrants from Africa and Asia (SIR 0.69 and 0.76 in first-generation, 0.51 and 0.74 in second-generation, respectively) and in adoptees from Asia (SIR 0.71). A high proportion of perforated appendicitis is associated with a low incidence rate of non-perforated appendicitis but no increase in the incidence rate of perforated appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The association of different incidence of appendicitis with geographic origin which remains over generations and is seen in adoptees suggest genetic etiologic factors. The proportion of perforation can be high without an increased incidence rate of perforation and is therefore an imperfect indicator of quality of care.