Conditional CT Strategy-An Effective Tool to Reduce Negative Appendectomy Rate and the Overuse of the CT

Diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains controversial. This systematic review details the evidence and current best practices for the evaluation and management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in adults and children.

METHODS

Eight questions regarding the diagnosis and management of appendicitis were formulated. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov/NLM were queried for articles published from 2010 to 2022 with key words related to at least one question. Randomized and non-randomized studies were included. Two reviewers screened each publication for eligibility and then extracted data from eligible studies. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on all quantitative data. The quality of randomized and non-randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 or Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively.

RESULTS

2792 studies were screened and 261 were included. Most had a high risk of bias. Computerized tomography scan yielded the highest sensitivity (> 80%) and specificity (> 93%) in the adult population, although high variability existed. In adults with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management resulted in higher odds of readmission (OR 6.10) and need for operation (OR 20.09), but less time to return to work/school (SMD - 1.78). In pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management also resulted in higher odds of need for operation (OR 38.31). In adult patients with complicated appendicitis, there were higher odds of need for operation following antibiotic treatment only (OR 29.00), while pediatric patients had higher odds of abscess formation (OR 2.23). In pediatric patients undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, higher risk of reoperation at any time point was observed in patients who had drains placed at the time of operation (RR 2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains nuanced. A personalized approach and appropriate patient selection remain key to treatment success. Further research on controversies in treatment would be useful for optimal management.

Other Pathologies Were Rarely Reported after Laparoscopic Surgery for Suspected Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic laparoscopy is often used when a patient is suspected of having acute appendicitis. The aim of this study was to assess the rate of other pathologies found during diagnostic laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This systematic search included studies with ≥100 patients who received laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis and reported on the histopathologic and other intra-abdominal findings. We performed a meta-analysis estimating the rate of other pathologies, and a sensitivity analysis excluding smaller cohorts (≤500 patients). Age groups, sex, specific findings, and geographic regions were investigated. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were included covering 25,547 patients and of these 793 had an unexpected pathology. The findings were benign pathology in the appendix (34%), malignancy (30%), gynecologic pathology (5%), gastrointestinal pathology (4%), or unspecified (27%). Meta-analysis showed an overall rate of unexpected findings of 3.5% (95% CI 2.7-4.3; moderate certainty), and the sensitivity analysis showed similar results. Malignancy found in the appendix when treating suspected acute appendicitis was 1.0% (95% CI 0.8-1.3%; high certainty).

CONCLUSION

The rate of other histopathological findings in patients with suspected acute appendicitis was low and a malignancy in appendix was found in 1% of patients.

Varying negative appendectomy rates after laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdominal pain, and treatment with laparoscopy has become increasingly common during the past two decades. Guidelines recommend that normal appendices are removed if operated for suspected acute appendicitis. It is unclear how many patients are affected by this recommendation. The aim of this study was to estimate the rate of negative appendectomies in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected acute appendicitis.

METHODS

This study was reported following the PRISMA 2020 statement. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase for retrospective or prospective cohort studies (with n ≥ 100) including patients with suspected acute appendicitis. The primary outcome was the histopathologically confirmed negative appendectomy rate after a laparoscopic approach with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed subgroup analyses on geographical region, age, sex, and use of preoperative imaging or scoring systems. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

In total, 74 studies were identified, summing up to 76,688 patients. The negative appendectomy rate varied from 0% to 46% in the included studies (interquartile range 4-20%). The meta-analysis estimated the negative appendectomy rate to be 13% (95% CI 12-14%) with large variations between the individual studies. Sensitivity analyses did not change the estimate. The certainty of evidence by GRADE was moderate due to inconsistency in point estimates.

CONCLUSION

The overall estimated negative appendectomy rate after laparoscopic surgery was 13% with moderate certainty of evidence. The negative appendectomy rate varied greatly between studies.

Self-Locking Polymeric Clips Are Safe for the Closure of Appendiceal Stump in Laparoscopic Appendectomy

Background: Closure of the appendix stump is critical to avoid serious postoperative complications. There are a number of options, but the best one has not been identified yet. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of appendiceal stump closure using self-locking polymeric clips and endoloops. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the prospectively maintained database of patients with acute appendicitis was performed. Patient demographic details and surgical characteristics, including the duration of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and also the cost of the appendix stump closure, were recorded. Patients were divided into two groups according to the appendix stump closure method: the clips group if it was closed with self-locking polymeric clips and the loops group if Vicryl or PDS loops were used. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson’s chi-squared test, Wilcoxon rank sum (Mann–Whitney U) test, and Fisher’s exact test in R statistical software package version 4.2.1. Results: 515 patients were included in the study from June 2016 to April 2021. There were no significant differences in terms of demographics (p-value in comparison of groups’ sex > 0.99, age p-value 0.16), postoperative complications (p-value > 0.99), histological findings (p-value 0.27), or length of hospital stays (p-value 0.18) between the two patient groups (clips group, N = 454 and loops group, N = 61). The price of operation while using different appendiceal stump closures is significantly different. In a laparoscopic appendectomy, one stump closure with self-locking clips costs 7.69 €, with Vicryl loops—91.35 €, with PDS loops—96.51 €, and with a stapler—514.50 €. Conclusions: Self-locking polymeric clips can be used for the safe and effective closure of an appendiceal stump. There were no significant differences in the postoperative time (30 days) or complication rates among patients in both (clips and loops) groups. Thus, this might be a technique to reduce expenses while maintaining good postoperative results after laparoscopic appendectomy.

Suspected and Confirmed Acute Appendicitis During the COVID-19 Pandemic: First and Second Quarantines—a Prospective Study

Purpose

COVID-19 posed an unprecedented modern global healthcare crisis affecting both elective and urgent surgeries. The aim of this study is to evaluate the difference in the presentation of acute appendicitis (AA) before and during the COVID-19 era, the first and second quarantines.

Methods

We performed a prospective study from December 2018 to May 2021. Two cohorts were analysed, one with patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with suspected AA and the second with confirmed AA. Both cohorts were divided into four groups: before COVID-19, during the first quarantine, between the first and second quarantine, and during the second quarantine. Data such as demographics, the time to first contact with the healthcare provider and time to operation, laboratory tests, clinical stage of AA, length of stay, and COVID-19 status were collected. A total of 469 patients were enrolled.

Results

A total of 209 patients were male (45%) and 260 were female (55%), with the median age being 33 years (24–45). In the first cohort of suspected AA, there was no difference in sex; however, more older patients presented to the ED during the first quarantine (41 years) compared with other groups (28.5, 36, and 32.5 years), p < 0.000. Before the pandemic, there was a shorter duration of symptoms to first contact with the healthcare provider (13 h) compared with other groups, p = 0.001. In the second cohort of confirmed AA, there was a shorter period of time to operation from first symptoms before the pandemic (22 h) compared with other groups (30, 35, 30.5 h), p < 0.000. There were more complicated gangrenous, perforated appendicitis or periappendicular abscess in Group 2 and 3 (26, 22 and 10%, and 26, 22 and 2%, respectively) compared with Group 1 (20, 4 and 3%) and Group 4 (22, 12, and 2%), p = 0.009. Hospital stay was longer during the first quarantine (3 days) compared with other groups (2 days), p = 0.009. Six patients were COVID-19 positive: one from Group 3 and five from Group 4 (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that during the first quarantine of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was delayed presentation to the ED with suspected AA and there was a greater proportion of complicated appendicitis and longer hospitalization in confirmed cases as well.

The Dynamics of Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Suspected Acute Appendicitis

Background: Laboratory tests of inflammatory mediators are routinely used in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences of dynamics of inflammatory markers of the blood in patients with suspected acute appendicitis between complicated AA (CAA), non-complicated AA (NAA), and when AA was excluded (No-AA). Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients presented to the Emergency Department (ER) of a tertiary hospital center during a three-year period. All patients suspected of acute appendicitis were prospectively registered from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018. The dynamics of inflammatory markers of the blood between different types of AA (No-AA, NAA or CAA) during different periods of time are presented. Results: A total of 453 patients were included in the study, with 297 patients in the No-AA group, 99 in the NAA group, and 57 in the CAA group. White blood cell (WBC) count in the No-AA decreased with time, with a statistically significant difference between the <8 h and 25–72 h group. The neutrophils (NEU) percentage decreased in the No-AA group and was statistically significantly different between the <8 h and 25–72 h and <8 h and >72 h groups. C-reactive protein (CRP) increased significantly in the No-AA group throughout all time intervals, and from the first 24 h to the 25–72 h in the NAA and CAA groups. There was a statistically significant difference between the WBC count between No-AA, NAA, and No-AA and CAA groups during the first 24 and 24–48 h. There was a statistically significant difference between NEU percentage and LYMP percentage and in the NEU/LYMP ratio between No-AA and CAA groups through all time periods. CRP was significantly higher in the first 24 h in the CAA than in the No-AA group, and in the 24–48 h in the CAA group than in the No-AA and NAA groups. The linear logistic regression model, involving inflammatory mediators and clinical characteristics, showed mediocre diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing AA with an AUC of 0.737 (0.671–0.802). Conclusions: Increasing concentrations of inflammatory markers are more characteristic in CAA patients than in No-AA during the first 48 h after onset of the disease. A combination of laboratory tests with clinical signs and symptoms has a mediocre diagnostic accuracy in suspecting AA.