Surgical management of primary appendiceal malignancy

Beyond acute appendicitis: a single-institution experience of unexpected pathology findings after 989 consecutive emergency appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

Appendiceal neoplasms (ANs) are rare, with an estimated incidence of around 1%: neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs) comprise most cases. Most tumours are cured by appendectomy alone, although some require right hemicolectomy and intra-operative chemotherapy. The aim of the present study is to evaluate our institution's experience in terms of the prevalence of AN, their histological types, treatment and outcomes in adult patients undergoing emergency appendectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Single-centre retrospective cohort analysis of patients treated for acute appendicitis at a large academic medical centre. Patients with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) where further compared with patients with acute appendicitis and a histologically confirmed diagnosis of appendiceal neoplasm (AN).

RESULTS

A diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made in 1200 patients. Of these, 989 patients underwent emergency appendectomy. The overall incidence of appendiceal neoplasm was 9.3% (92 patients). AN rate increased with increasing age. Patients under the age of 30 had a 3.8% (14/367 patients) rate of occult neoplasm, whereas patients between 40 and 89 years and older had a 13.0% rate of neoplasm. No difference was found in clinical presentations and type of approach while we found a lower complicated appendicitis rate in the AN group.

CONCLUSION

ANs are less rare with respect to the literature; however, clinically, there are no specific signs of suspicious and simple appendicectomy appears to be curative in most cases. However, age plays an important role; older patients are at higher risk for AN. ANs still challenge the non-operative management concept introduced into the surgical literature.

Which is the appropriate surgical procedure for appendiceal adenocarcinoma: appendectomy, partial colectomy or right hemicolectomy?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore the appropriate surgical procedure and clinical decision for appendiceal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A total of 1,984 appendiceal adenocarcinoma patients from 2004 to 2015 were retrospectively identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. All patients were divided into three groups based on the extent of surgical resection: appendectomy (N = 335), partial colectomy (N = 390) and right hemicolectomy (N = 1,259). The clinicopathological features and survival outcomes of three groups were compared, and independent prognostic factors were assessed.

RESULTS

The 5-year OS rates of patients who underwent appendectomy, partial colectomy and right hemicolectomy were 58.3%, 65.5% and 69.1%, respectively (right hemicolectomy vs appendectomy, P < 0.001; right hemicolectomy vs partial colectomy, P = 0.285; partial colectomy vs appendectomy, P = 0.045). The 5-year CSS rates of patients who underwent appendectomy, partial colectomy and right hemicolectomy were 73.2%, 77.0% and 78.7%, respectively (right hemicolectomy vs appendectomy, P = 0.046; right hemicolectomy vs partial colectomy, P = 0.545; partial colectomy vs appendectomy, P = 0.246). The subgroup analysis based on the pathological TNM stage indicated that there was no survival difference amongst three surgical procedures for stage I patients (5-year CSS rate: 90.8%, 93.9% and 98.1%, respectively). The prognosis of patients who underwent an appendectomy was poorer than that of those who underwent partial colectomy (5-year OS rate: 53.5% vs 67.1%, P = 0.005; 5-year CSS rate: 65.2% vs 78.7%, P = 0.003) or right hemicolectomy (5-year OS rate: 74.2% vs 53.23%, P < 0.001; 5-year CSS rate: 65.2% vs 82.5%, P < 0.001) for stage II disease. Right hemicolectomy did not show a survival advantage over partial colectomy for stage II (5-year CSS, P = 0.255) and stage III (5-year CSS, P = 0.846) appendiceal adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Right hemicolectomy may not always be necessary for appendiceal adenocarcinoma patients. An appendectomy could be sufficient for therapeutic effect of stage I patients, but limited for stage II patients. Right hemicolectomy was not superior to partial colectomy for advanced stage patients, suggesting omission of standard hemicolectomy might be feasible. However, adequate lymphadenectomy should be strongly recommended.

Appendiceal cancer showing a submucosal tumor-like morphology in the ascending colon on colonoscopy: a case report

Few reports have described a submucosal tumor (SMT)-like colon tumor together with appendiceal cancer. Moreover, some appendiceal tumors may exhibit a cecal protuberance. Here, we report an uncommon case of appendiceal cancer with an SMT-like tumor, which was a protuberant lesion in the ascending colon. To our knowledge, this is the first report in Japan. Our case was a 50-year-old man with an ascending colon tumor presented at our hospital for further evaluation of this lesion. This was discovered as a cystic lesion near the ascending colon on colonoscopy. Our initial diagnosis was an ascending colon SMT-like tumor, and our treatment strategy was laparoscopic resection. The differential diagnosis was appendiceal cancer or mucocele. Postoperative pathological findings led to a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the appendix. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was followed up with computed tomography and blood sampling on an outpatient basis.

The association between appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal neoplasm histology-a population-based study

PURPOSE

Recent studies have reported alarming appendiceal tumor rates associated with complicated acute appendicitis, especially in patients presenting with a periappendicular abscess. However, the data on histology of appendiceal tumors among acute appendicitis patients is limited, especially in patient cohorts differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. We have previously reported the association of increased appendiceal tumor prevalence with complicated acute appendicitis in this population-based study. The objective of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the association of both appendicitis severity and patient age with appendiceal tumor histology.

METHODS

This nationwide population-based registry study (The Finnish Cancer Registry) was conducted from 2007 to 2013. All appendiceal tumors (n = 840) and available medical reports (n = 504) of these patients at eight study hospitals were previously evaluated, identifying altogether 250 patients with both acute appendicitis and appendiceal tumor.

RESULTS

The severity of acute appendicitis was significantly associated with more malignant tumor histology. The risk of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly higher among patients with periappendicular abscess (OR 15.05, CI 95% 6.98-32.49, p < 0.001) and patients presenting with perforated acute appendicitis (OR 4.09, CI 95% 1.69-9.90, p = 0.0018) compared to patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Similarly, patient age over 40 years was significantly associated with the risk of adenocarcinoma and pseudomyxoma (OR 26.46, Cl 95% 7.95-88.09, p < 0.001). Patient sex was not associated with a more malignant appendiceal tumor histology (p = 0.67).

CONCLUSION

More malignant appendiceal tumor histology of adenocarcinoma or pseudomyxoma was significantly associated with patient age over 40 years and complicated acute appendicitis, especially periappendicular abscess.

Appendiceal Carcinoid Tumor Contained in a Large Inguinal Hernia: A Case Report

We report the first case of a clinically diagnosed incidental appendiceal carcinoid tumor contained in an incarcerated inguinal hernia without inflammation of the appendix. A 67-year-old white man underwent elective open repair of an incarcerated right inguinal hernia containing small bowel, cecum, appendix, and ascending colon. He was found to have a grossly abnormal mass at the tip of his appendix. Appendectomy was performed, and histopathologic analysis confirmed the presence and adequate resection of a neuroendocrine tumor. It is important for general surgeons to be aware that unusual presentations of appendiceal tumors may not be associated with appendiceal inflammation or related symptoms.

A Predictive Model for Nodal Metastases in Patients With Appendiceal Cancers

BACKGROUND

Histologic subtypes of appendiceal cancer vary in their propensity for metastases to regional lymph nodes (LN). A predictive model would help direct subsequent surgical therapy.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with appendiceal cancer undergoing surgery between 1998 and 2012. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a predictive model of LN metastases which was internally validated using Brier score and Area under the Curve (AUC).

RESULTS

A total of 21,647 patients were identified, of whom 9079 (41.9%) had node negative disease, 4575 (21.1%) node positive disease, and 7993 (36.9%) unknown LN status. The strongest predictors of LN positivity were histology (carcinoid tumors OR 12.78, 95% CI 9.01-18.12), increasing T Stage (T3 OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.52-4.50, T4 OR 6.30, 95% CI 4.71-8.42), and tumor grade (G3 OR 5.55, 95% CI 4.78-6.45, G4 OR 5.98, 95% CI 4.30-8.31). The coefficients from the regression analysis were used to construct a calculator that generated predicted probabilities of LN metastases given certain inputs. Internal validation of the overall model showed an AUC of 0.75 (95% CI 0.74-0.76) and Brier score of 0.188. Histology-specific predictive models were also constructed with an AUC that varied from 0.669 for signet cell to 0.75 for goblet cell tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk for nodal metastases in patients with appendiceal cancers can be quantified with reasonable accuracy using a predictive model incorporating patient age, sex, tumor histology, T-stage, and grade. This can help inform clinical decision making regarding the need for a right hemicolectomy following appendectomy.

Increased risk of malignancy for patients older than 40 years with appendicitis and an appendix wider than 10 mm on computed tomography scan: A post hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of underlying malignancy in appendicitis ranges between 0.5% and 1.7%. We sought to identify the subset of patients with appendicitis who are at increased risk of appendiceal malignancy.

METHODS

Using the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multicenter Study of the Treatment of Appendicitis in America: Acute, Perforated, and Gangrenous database, we included all patients from 28 centers undergoing immediate, delayed, or interval appendectomy between 2017 and 2018. Univariate then multivariable analyses were performed to compare patients with and without malignancy and to identify independent demographic, clinical, laboratory, and/or radiological predictors of malignancy. Akaike information criteria for regression models were used to evaluate goodness of fit.

RESULTS

A total of 3,293 patients were included. The median age was 38 (27-53) years, and 46.5% were female patients. On pathology, 48 (1.5%) had an underlying malignancy (adenocarcinoma [60.4%], neuroendocrine [37.5%], and lymphoma [2.1%]). Patients with malignancy were older (56 [34.5-67] vs 37 [27-52] years, P < .001), had longer duration of symptoms before presentation (36-41 vs 18-23 hours, P = .03), and were more likely to have a phlegmon on imaging (6.3% vs 1.3%, P = .03). Multivariable analyses showed that an enlarged appendiceal diameter was independently associated with malignancy (odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.12; P = .01). The incidence of malignancy in patients >40 years with an appendiceal diameter >10 mm on computed tomography was 2.95% compared with 0.97% in patients ≤40 years old with appendiceal diameter ≤10 mm. The corresponding risk ratio for that population was 3.03 (95% confidence interval: 1.24-7.42; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The combination of age >40 and an appendiceal diameter >10 mm is associated with a greater than 3-fold increased risk of malignancy in patients presenting with appendicitis.

Management of acute appendicitis in adults: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) has been considered one of the most common acute surgical conditions in the world. Recent studies, however, have suggested that nonoperative management (NOM) with a course of antibiotics (ABX) may be as effective as surgery in treating appendicitis. As there are evolving perspectives regarding the optimal therapy for appendicitis, we sought to provide recommendations regarding the role of NOM with the administration of antibiotics (antibiotics-first approach) in uncomplicated AA as well as the need for routine interval appendectomy (RIA) in those presenting with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon (AAP) initially managed without appendectomy.

METHODS

A writing group from the Guidelines Committee of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature regarding appendicitis in adult populations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was applied and meta-analyses and evidence profiles generated.

RESULTS

When comparing antibiotics-first therapy to surgery for uncomplicated AA in adult populations, we found that perforation and recurrence of disease were the only outcomes consistently represented in the literature. For perforation, we were unable to make a definitive conclusion based on the degree of heterogeneity among the six randomized controlled trials reviewed. The risk of recurrence at 1 year with antibiotics-first treatment was 15.8% (95% confidence interval, 12.05-118.63). Critical outcomes could not be evaluated with the current literature. In NOM patients for AAP, the risk of recurrence was 24.3% if RIA was not performed (95% confidence interval, 2.74-73.11).

CONCLUSION

Based on the completed meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation profiles, we were unable to make a recommendation for or against the antibiotics-first approach as primary treatment for uncomplicated AA. For NOM with AAP, we conditionally recommend against RIA in an otherwise asymptomatic patient. This review reveals multiple limitations of the published literature, leaving ample opportunities for additional research on this topic.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level II.

A Nomogram for Predicting Lymph Nodal Metastases in Patients with Appendiceal Cancers: An Analysis of SEER Database

BACKGROUNDS

Appendiceal cancers are usually diagnosed after appendectomy accidentally. The need for subsequent right hemicolectomy in these patients was determined by the potential risk of regional lymph node (LN) metastasis. Establishing a nomogram to forecast the potential risk of lymph node metastasis of appendiceal cancer could help in the next step of treatment.

METHODS

Patients with appendiceal cancer undergoing surgery was queried in the American cancer database of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database from 2004 to 2016. A nomogram was established based on Logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Finally, 3,075 patients were diagnosed with appendectomy cancer from 2004 to 2016. Among them, there were 2028 (65.9%) cases with negative lymph nodes, 1047 (34.1%) cases with positive lymph nodes. Risk factors associated with lymph node metastasis include age, histological type, tissue grade, T stage, distant metastasis, and tumor size. We drew the ROC curves of the training group（0.754, P < 0.001） and the validation group （0.775, P < 0.001） respectively. C-index values of predictions were 0.772 (95%CI, 0.750-0.793) and 0.776 (95%CI, 0.746-0.807), and Brier score were 0.178 and 0.172 in training and validation group respectively. All of them showed excellent performance of the nomogram in our study.

CONCLUSION

A new nomogram was created to assess the potential risk of LN metastasis in patients of appendiceal cancer by utilizing age, tumor histology, tumor pathologic grade, tumor size, T-stage, and M-stage. The nomogram could provide a strong reference for the right hemicolectomy and facilitate clinic decision.

Rates of colorectal cancer detection in screening colonoscopy post appendicectomy in patients 50 years and over

Introduction

Acute appendicitis in older adults is relatively uncommon and could be the first presentation of an underlying colorectal carcinoma. Colonoscopy in these individuals affords the opportunity for earlier diagnosis and treatment. The finding of increased rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) with older patients who have had appendicitis was supported by a number of small studies and case reports in the early 1980s.With the advent of CT scanning and laparoscopic appendicectomy, increased ability to visualize the caecum has been achieved.

Purpose

A retrospective 12-month study of all patients presenting with acute appendicitis aged 50 years and over from 1st May 2017 to 31st May 2018, and review of post operative screening colonoscopy findings.

Results

Forty-three patients met inclusion criteria. The patients' median age was 62 years (range 50-85 years). 47% of the patients were male. 86% of patients had abdominal CT scans prior to surgery with acute appendicitis visualized in 97% of these cases. Acute appendicitis was found in 100% of cases with no clinical suggestion of CRC operatively or pathologically. 46% of patients had pertinent findings on colonoscopy. This included a malignant obstructing tumour at the hepatic flexure and a tubular adenoma in the transverse colon in a second patient. The remaining findings in this cohort of patients included diverticular disease and benign polyps.

Conclusion

Despite the advancement in visualization of anatomy with CT scan and laparoscopic appendicectomy there is still a role for screening colonoscopy in patients greater than 50 years of age with appendicitis particularly if they have associated bowel symptoms or risk factors for CRC.

Appendiceal Neoplasms

Appendiceal neoplasms are identified in 0.9 to 1.4% of appendiceal specimens, and the incidence is increasing. It has long been professed that neuroendocrine tumors (formerly carcinoids) are the most common neoplastic process of the appendix; recent data, however, has suggested a shift in epidemiology. Our intent is to distill the complex into an algorithm, and, in doing so, enable the surgeon to seamlessly maneuver through operative decisions, treatment strategies, and patient counseling. The algorithm for evaluation and treatment is complex, often starts from the nonspecific presenting complaint of appendicitis, and relies heavily on often subtle histopathologic differences.

Analysis of Appendiceal Neoplasms on 3544 Appendectomy Specimens for Acute Appendicitis: Retrospective Cohort Study of a Single Institution

Background

Appendiceal neoplasms are rare and generally determined in appendectomy specimens for acute appendicitis. Depending on a tumor’s histopathology and size, appendectomy or right hemicolectomy are the surgical treatment options. Adenocarcinomas, mucinous neoplasms, goblet cell carcinoids and neuroendocrine tumors are the types of the primary appendiceal neoplasm histopathology. In this study, we aimed to determine the incidence of appendiceal neoplasms in an acute appendicitis cohort. Also, histopathological distributions, demographic data, preoperative radiological diagnosis, and intraoperative findings were revealed for analysis, retrospectively.

Material/Methods

Between October 2011 and September 2017, 3554 appendectomies were performed for acute appendicitis in Bezmialem University Hospital, Istanbul Turkey. The medical records of these consecutive 3554 patients were evaluated retrospectively. After the histopathological analysis of the appendectomy specimens, a total of 28 patients were detected as having appendiceal neoplasm including appendiceal adenocarcinoma, low grade mucinous neoplasia, and appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors.

Results

Appendiceal neoplasms were determined in 28 out of 3554 acute appendicitis patients with an incidence of 0.78%. According to the histopathological types, 3 of the cases (10.7%) were appendiceal adenocarcinoma, 8 of the cases (28.5%) were low grade mucinous neoplasia, and 17 of the cases (60.8%) were neuroendocrine tumors. The overall incidence of the appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors was 0.48%.

Conclusions

The information obtained from our study suggests that pathological examination of the specimen may not be necessary if there is no doubt according to preoperative radiological diagnosis and/or intraoperative findings of the surgeon.

Appendicitis in Cancer Patients is often Observed and Can Represent Appendiceal Malignancy

Appendectomy is standard of care for uncomplicated appendicitis, but cancer patients may not be optimal surgical candidates. Interval appendectomy is controversial, and appendiceal malignancy is rare. Study objectives were to review the role of surgery, observation, and interventional radiology (IR)-guided drainage in patients with appendicitis and advanced malignancy. Retrospective review was performed on cancer patients presenting to a tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2014. Patients diagnosed with appendicitis were assigned to observation, surgery, and IR drainage after surgical evaluation. Success rates of initial treatment strategies were calculated. Rates of interval appendectomies and pathology were reviewed. Of 72 consults, 32 patients were included. Median age was 53 years, 50 per cent (16/32) were male, 50 per cent (16/32) had chemotherapy less than six weeks to presentation, and 63 per cent (20/32) had advanced stage malignancy. Of the 62.5 per cent (20/32) observed, 25 per cent (8/32) received immediate surgery, 12.5 per cent (4/32) required IR drainage, and 69 per cent (22/32) of patients were initially managed without surgery. Interval appendectomy rate was 19 per cent (6/32). Pathology confirmed appendiceal malignancies in 9.3 per cent (3/32). Cancer patients with acute appendicitis are frequently observed. High incidence of appendiceal malignancy may be due to the older median age. Interval appendectomy should be considered in this population.