Peritoneal irrigation vs suction alone during pediatric appendectomy for perforated appendicitis: A meta-analysis

Case Report: A rare instance of acute appendicitis induced by Balantidium Coli parasitic infection

Introduction

Acute appendicitis secondary to parasitic infections is uncommon, being detected in less than 1% of cases. Balantidium coli is a parasite found in pigs and primates with zoonotic potential. To date, only three cases of acute appendicitis induced by this parasite have been documented globally.

Case

A 7-year-old female patient, who consumed pork daily, presented to the emergency department with a one-day history of abdominal pain in the lower quadrants, described as colic-like, alongside abdominal distension. Initial abdominal radiography led to a diagnosis of intestinal obstruction. Conservative management without therapeutic response necessitated referral to a higher complexity center. Upon admission, an abdominal computed tomography scan diagnosed acute appendicitis and secondary ileus. During surgical intervention, an appendiceal phlegmon formed by loops of the small intestine was mechanically released, revealing a perforated appendix with extensive fecal peritoneal contamination. Pathological analysis identified an inflammatory infiltrate and the presence of Balantidium coli trophozoites. Medical treatment included Piperacillin-Tazobactam and Metronidazole. The patient was discharged after 10 days of medical treatment.

Discussion

Acute appendicitis caused by Balantidium coli is a rare occurrence. It is crucial to identify parasites in pathological samples due to their impact on postoperative management. The close contact between humans and pigs, especially in developing countries, suggests that the prevalence of parasitic infection and colonization by Balantidium coli may be higher than currently recognized. Regarding the identification of this patient's specific exposure, the regular consumption of pork suggests the hypothesis that improper processing is linked to the acquisition of the parasitic infection.

Alternative Antimicrobial Irrigation Strategies for the Treatment of Infections in Children: A Review of the Existing Literature

As a synergistic treatment approach with systemic antimicrobial therapy or a systemic antibiotic-sparing strategy, the local administration of antimicrobial agents has been proposed as an alternative route for complicated infections. With the rationale of concentrating the active principle in the desired target site, avoiding potentially toxic systemic levels and bypassing anatomical and physiological barriers, local irrigation or infusion of antibiotics may effectively shorten the antimicrobial therapy course and reduce both infection-related and systemic therapy-related complications. Although evidence from the adult population supports its use in selected patients with an acceptable safety profile, data specifically focused on the pediatric population are limited. To provide a rapid and easily accessible tool for clinical practice, we synthesized the most relevant evidence on the use of local antimicrobial agents in common severe infections in children: meningitis, mediastinitis, pleural infections, recurrent urinary infections, and peritonitis. A literature search was performed using predefined combined keywords through an electronic research database (PubMed). Described molecules, dosages, routes, treated age groups, and related efficacy have been summarized for prompt application to clinical practice. It should, however, be noted that the evidence for the pediatric population remains limited, and the local administration of several molecules remains off-label. A careful multidisciplinary and patient-tailored evaluation, as well as a rational use of available guidelines, should always be the basis of clinical decision making in settings where local administration of antibiotics may be considered.

Perforated appendicitis: The solution to pollution is not dilution

BACKGROUND

Surgical dogma states that the "solution to pollution is dilution." We hypothesized that withholding irrigation during pediatric Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) appendectomies for perforated appendicitis would decrease postoperative abscess rate.

METHODS

From May 2011 to 5/2015, during SILS appendectomies, saline irrigation and suctioning was performed. From June 2015 to 8/2021, only suctioning was performed. The operations and peri-operative management were otherwise identical. We retrospectively reviewed 46 patients in the Irrigation (I) Group and 91 patients in the Non-Irrigation (NI) Group.

RESULTS

Abscess rate decreased from 19.6% in Group I to 9.9% in Group NI, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.12). Operative duration was significantly longer in patients who developed postoperative abscesses in Group NI (odds ratio 1.67, p = 0.002) and overall (odds ratio 1.45, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Withholding irrigation during SILS appendectomies trended toward a decreased postoperative abscess rate. Increased operative times were associated with postoperative abscess formation.

Peritoneal antiseptic irrigation to prevent surgical site infection after laparotomy for hepatobiliary or gastrointestinal surgery (PAISI)-protocol for a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) remain common after laparotomy for resections of the gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary tract. Especially organ/space infections (CDC class III SSI) can be life-threatening, require relaparotomy, intensive care or interventional drainage of intraabdominal abscesses. The PAISI study aims to investigate whether the use of prophylactic peritoneal irrigation with NaOCl/HOCl solution can reduce the SSI rates following laparotomy for resections of the gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary tract, compared to standard irrigation with physiological electrolyte solution (Ringer's solution). Secondarily, to evaluate whether the use of prophylactic peritoneal irrigation with NaOCl/HOCl solution can reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality as well as the rate of re-operations and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

PAISI is a prospective, randomized, observer- and patient-blinded, monocentric, two-arm surgical study in an adaptive parallel groups design, comparing peritoneal and wound irrigation with NaOCl/HOCl (50/50ppm) solution to irrigation with Ringer's solution. The primary endpoint of the study is the SSI rate within 30 days postoperatively. Since there is no data on incidence rates from randomized clinical trials, the rates for sample size calculation were estimated according to the clinical experience at our institution. Therefore, the study design includes one unblinded look at the data by a second statistician, which will be performed after half of the patients reached the primary endpoint. This interim information will be used to check the assumptions and if needed, the sample size will be adjusted. The O'Brien-Fleming spending function is used to determine the efficacy test boundary and the non-binding futility boundary. The one-sided z-test (Group sequential test of two proportions) at the 2.5% significance level with a total of two looks at the data will have overall 80% power.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will provide high-level evidence for future research and clinical recommendations regarding the use of NaOCl/HOCl solution in abdominal surgery and provide the participating patients the opportunity of a potentially improved treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00028037. Registered on 27 May 2022.

Evaluation of Drain Insertion After Appendicectomy for Complicated Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of drain insertion versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus was conducted, and all studies comparing drain versus no drain after appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis were included. Abdominal collection, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, faecal fistula, paralytic ileus, length of hospital stay (LOS) and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Seventeen studies reporting a total number of 4,255 patients who underwent appendicectomy for complicated appendicitis with (n=1,580) or without (n=2,657) drain were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding abdominal collection (odds ratio (OR)=1.41, P=0.13). No-drain group was superior to the drain group regarding SSI (OR=1.93, P=0.0001), faecal fistula (OR=4.76, P=0.03), intestinal obstruction (OR=2.40, P=0.04) and paralytic ileus (OR=2.07, P=0.01). There was a difference regarding mortality rate between the two groups (3.4% in the drain group vs 0.5% in the no-drain group, risk difference (RD)=0.01, 95% CI (-0.01, 0.04), P=0.36). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has shown that drains have no effect on the development of intra-abdominal collections in complicated appendicitis, but it can significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications such as fistula, surgical site infection (SSI), bowel obstruction, ileus and length of hospital stay.

Peritoneal lavage during laparoscopic appendectomy for complex appendicitis is associated with increased post-operative morbidity

AIM

Appendicitis is one of the most common paediatric surgical pathologies seen by paediatric surgeons worldwide. Laparoscopic appendectomy is undertaken for all cases of appendicitis in our institute. Intraperitoneal lavage following appendectomy is the conventional way of managing complicated appendicitis; however, some surgeons debate the efficacy of this practice. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of intraperitoneal lavage versus suction only in children with complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively between January 2018 and January 2019. All patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for complex appendicitis were included and divided into two groups, patients who had suction only and those who had lavage and suction. Outcome parameters studied were the length of stay (LOS), number of temperature spikes > 37.7 (TS), operative times (OT) and readmission for intra-abdominal collections. Comparison between the two groups was performed using two sample t-test with unequal variance, significance was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients were included (lavage n = 52, Suction n = 63). The LOS (P = 0.0054), TS (0.0109), OT (P < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the lavage group compared to the suction-only group. Overall rates of readmission were similar between groups, however, readmission for the confirmed intra-abdominal collection was more common in the lavage group.

CONCLUSION

Based on our study, it appears that there is no advantage in performing an intraperitoneal lavage for complex appendicitis. It resulted in a prolonged stay, more post-operative TS and longer operative duration. The likelihood of being readmitted with an intra-abdominal collection following a lavage was higher compared to suction only.

Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in children: does the post-operative peritoneal drain make any difference? A pilot prospective randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

This was a pilot randomised, prospective study, which aimed to determine and compare the post-operative complications of paediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for complicated appendicitis, with and without a peritoneal drain.

METHODS

Patients younger than 13 years, undergoing LA for complicated appendicitis at the Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospital (DGMAH), over a 15-month period during 2019-2020 were enrolled. Randomisation was achieved by a blocked randomisation plan. Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio into the "drain" (D) and "no drain" (ND) groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were included in this study; seventeen in each group. The complication rate was 26%. Intra-abdominal collection accounted for 89% of the complications. The complication rate in the "D" group was 18% and 35% in the "ND" group, with no statistically significant difference. Complication rates were higher (38%) in patients with generalised pus when compared to localised pus (7%), although not statistically significant. The mean theatre time, hospital stay, and duration of antibiotic use did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSION

From our study, the post-operative peritoneal drain did not make any statistically significant difference in patient outcome. The amount of intra-abdominal contamination is more likely to contribute in the development of complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

SMUREC/M/15/2019: PG.

Aspiration versus peritoneal lavage in appendicitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is one of the most frequent abdominal surgical emergencies. Intra-abdominal abscess is a frequent post-operative complication. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare peritoneal irrigation and suction versus suction only when performing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.

METHODS

According to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted and registered into the Prospero register (CRD42020186848). The risk of bias was defined to be from low to moderate.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies (9 RCTs and 8 CCTs) were selected, including 5315 patients. There was no statistical significance in post-operative intra-abdominal abscess in open (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.75-2.15; I2 = 74%) and laparoscopic group (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.73-3.13; I2 = 83%). No statistical significance in reoperation rate in open (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.04-2.49; I2 = 18%) and laparoscopic group (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.64-2.49; I2 = 18%). In both open and laparoscopic groups, operative time was lower in the suction group (RR 7.13, 95% CI 3.14-11.12); no statistical significance was found for hospital stay (MD - 0.39, 95% CI - 1.07 to 0.30; I2 = 91%) and the rate of wound infection (MD 1.16, 95% CI 0.56-2.38; I2 = 71%).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has failed to demonstrate the statistical superiority of employing intra-operative peritoneal irrigation and suction over suction-only to reduce the rate of post-operative complications after appendectomy, but all the articles report clinical superiority in terms of post-operative abscess, wound infection and operative times in suction-only group.

Irrigation during laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis increases the operative time and reoperation rate: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

This meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) aimed to compare peritoneal irrigation followed by suction with aspiration only during laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis (LA). PRISMA guidelines with the random-effects model were adopted using Review Manager Version 5.3 for pooled estimates. We retained six eligible RCT published between 2012 and 2019. They involved a total of 1019 patients (541 patients in the aspiration group and 478 patients in the irrigation group). Aspiration only during LA is associated with shorter operative time (MD = 8.50 min, 95% CI [- 12.97 to - 4.02], p = 0.0002) and lower reoperation rate (OR = 0.37 95% CI [0.14-0.96], p = 0.04). There was no difference between aspiration group and irrigation group in terms of Intraperitoneal abscess (IPA) (OR = 0.99 95% CI [0.54-1.81], p = 0.95), morbidity rate (OR = 1.14 95% CI [0.44-2.98], p = 0.79), wound infection (OR = 0.94 95% CI [0.20-4.40], p = 0.94), and hospital stay (MD = 0.65 day, 95% CI [- 0.52 to 1.82], p = 0.27). Irrigation during LA prevents post-appendectomy IPA in neither adults nor pediatric patients. However, it lengthens the operative time and involves a higher reoperation rate.

Effect and safety of peritoneal lavage for appendectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether peritoneal lavage is beneficial for the postoperative outcomes of appendectomy is debatable. This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that aimed to determine whether peritoneal lavage leads to improved appendectomy outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published before September 2020. The meta-analysis calculated the pooled effect size by using a random effects model. The primary outcome was the incidence of intra-abdominal abscess. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of surgical-site infection, hospital stay duration, operation time, and readmission incidence.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 1487 patients were reviewed. The lavage group had a nonsignificantly lower incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (risk ratio [RR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.18) and surgical-site infection (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.31-1.72) than did the nonirrigation group. Furthermore, the lavage group showed a nonsignificantly shorter hospital stay duration and lower readmission incidence than did the nonirrigation group. However, the lavage group required significantly more operation time than did the nonirrigation group (mean difference: 7.59 min; 95% CI: 4.67-10.50).

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that performing peritoneal lavage has no advantage over suction or drainage only in appendectomy. Moreover, peritoneal lavage significantly increased operation time. Consequently, for improving efficiency and reducing operation time, we suggest skipping peritoneal irrigation during appendectomy. However, the available evidence is of variable quality; therefore, high-quality prospective RCTs are required in the future.

[Appendectomy technique: paradigm shift or a well-forgotten old one? The role of mesoappendectomy in prevention of infectious intra-abdominal complications (announcement of RCT)]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the role of mesoappendixectomy in the development of intra-abdominal surgical site infection (IAB SSI) after LAE.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective randomized non-blind multiple-center registered (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03754777) study has been performed for the period from 2016 to 2018. The study was devoted to effectiveness and safety of the modified enhanced recovery protocol in LAE. In the main group, this protocol (n=56) included routine mesoappendixectomy, restrictive strategy for abdominal drainage and postoperative antibiotic prevention. In the control group (n=71), mesoappendixectomy was performed only in case of necrotic changes. Both groups were comparable by demographic parameters and severity of comorbidities.

RESULTS

In the main group, significant decrease in the incidence of IAB SSI was found (0% versus 9.8%). Moreover, the main group was characterized by reduced length of hospital-stay (1.43±1.34 d versus 2.94±2, 43 days).

CONCLUSION

Mesoappendixectomy should be evaluated in further research as a potential factor in prevention of IAB SSI.

Effects of Sequence of Irrigation, Suction, and Extraction in Cases of Acute Purulent Appendicitis or Gangrenous Perforated Appendicitis After Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Objective: To evaluate rates of postoperative infection in patients with acute purulent appendicitis or gangrenous perforated appendicitis after laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study the medical records of patients who had undergone LA for acute appendicitis at Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College between January 2015 and December 2019 were reviewed. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the sequential order in which peritoneal irrigation, suction, and extraction of appendix had been performed. In Group 1 peritoneal irrigation and suction had been performed before extraction of the appendix, and in Group 2 they had been performed after extraction of the appendix. Demographic details, surgery duration, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay, total hospitalization expenses, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Results: The final study sample included 571 patients, 116 (20.3%) in Group 1 and 455 (79.7%) in Group 2. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics, preoperative white blood cell counts, surgery durations, lengths of hospital stay, or total hospitalization expenses between the 2 groups (P > .05). Time to first flatus was significantly shorter in Group 1 (2.1 ± 0.5 days) than in Group 2 (2.3 ± 0.6) (P = .016), and the incidence of surgical wound infection was lower in Group 1 (6.9%) than in Group 2 (14.1%) (P = .038). There were no significant differences in the rates of intra-abdominal abscess, small bowel obstruction, or readmission within 30 days between the 2 groups (P > .05). Conclusion: Patients with acute purulent appendicitis or gangrenous perforated appendicitis are at high risk of surgical wound infection. Peritoneal irrigation and suction before appendix extraction may reduce the incidence of postoperative wound infection.