Treatment options of inflammatory appendiceal masses in adults

Comparison Between Early Appendectomy vs. Conservative Management in Cases of Appendicular Mass

INTRODUCTION

At present, the treatment of choice for appendicular masses is unclear. Recent studies claimed that conservative management of appendicular masses was safe in terms of frequency of perforation. However, there is controversy in the existing literature.

OBJECTIVE

This research is designed to compare the results of early appendectomy versus conservative management of appendicular masses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

It was a randomized controlled trial performed in the Combined Military Hospital, Lahore. The study lasted six months, from 01/03/2019 to 30/09/2019. It involved 60 patients of both genders aged between 16 and 70 years diagnosed with appendicular masses with an Alvarado score of 4-7. These patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups. In Group A patients, an early appendectomy was performed, while patients in Group B were managed conservatively. Outcome variables were the mean length of hospital stay and frequency of appendicular perforation.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 26.8±11.9 years. There were 33 (55.0%) male and 27 (45.0%) female patients, with a male-to-female ratio of 1.2:1. The mean length of hospital stay was significantly longer in patients managed conservatively as compared to those undergoing early appendectomy (2.80±1.54 vs. 1.83±0.83; p=0.004). However, the frequency of perforation was not significantly higher in the conservative group as compared to the early appendectomy group (16.7% vs. 10.0%; p=0.448).

CONCLUSION

Conservative management of patients with appendicular mass was associated with prolonged hospital stays, yet it was found equally safe in terms of frequency of appendicular perforation, which advocates conservative management of patients with appendicular mass, particularly in high-risk patients.

An Occlusive Form of Acute Gangrenous Appendicitis With Periappendicular Abscess in an Elderly Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review

Acute appendicitis represents one of the common causes of admission to the emergency department. In rare cases, patients with appendicitis can suffer complications such as intestinal obstruction. These particular cases of occlusive appendicitis with a periappendicular abscess usually occur in elderly patients and can develop in an aggressive form, nonetheless with a favorable evolution. We present a case of an 80-year-old male patient, reporting symptoms similar to an occlusive digestive pathology: abdominal pain, intestinal transit disorders, and fecal vomiting. A computerized tomography scan suggested a mechanical bowel obstruction. The patient had an exploratory laparotomy indication to find the cause of the obstruction. The peritoneal cavity inspection revealed an occlusive form of acute gangrenous appendicitis with a periappendicular abscess. An appendectomy was performed. In conclusion, as surgeons, we must always take into consideration that acute appendicitis can represent a cause of intestinal obstruction, especially in elderly patients.

Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus dfa1 Attenuate Cecal Ligation-Induced Systemic Inflammation through the Interference in Gut Dysbiosis, Leaky Gut, and Enterocytic Cell Energy

Despite an uncommon condition, the clinical management of phlegmon appendicitis (retention of the intra-abdominal appendiceal abscess) is still controversial, and probiotics might be partly helpful. Then, the retained ligated cecal appendage (without gut obstruction) with or without oral Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus dfa1 (started at 4 days prior to the surgery) was used as a representative model. At 5 days post-surgery, the cecal-ligated mice demonstrated weight loss, soft stool, gut barrier defect (leaky gut using FITC-dextran assay), fecal dysbiosis (increased Proteobacteria with reduced bacterial diversity), bacteremia, elevated serum cytokines, and spleen apoptosis without kidney and liver damage. Interestingly, the probiotics attenuated disease severity as indicated by stool consistency index, FITC-dextran assay, serum cytokines, spleen apoptosis, fecal microbiota analysis (reduced Proteobacteria), and mortality. Additionally, impacts of anti-inflammatory substances from culture media of the probiotics were demonstrated by attenuation of starvation injury in the Caco-2 enterocyte cell line as indicated by transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER), inflammatory markers (supernatant IL-8 with gene expression of TLR4 and NF-κB), cell energy status (extracellular flux analysis), and the reactive oxygen species (malondialdehyde). In conclusion, gut dysbiosis and leaky-gut-induced systemic inflammation might be helpful clinical parameters for patients with phlegmon appendicitis. Additionally, the leaky gut might be attenuated by some beneficial molecules from probiotics.

The Application of Dual-Pathway Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Treatment of Periappendiceal Abscesses

OBJECTIVES

To explore the value of an ultrasound contrast agent (Sonovue) as an interventional treatment for periappendiceal abscesses.

METHODS

From January 2019 to December 2020, 30 patients were recruited who were admitted to Jinan Central Hospital due to periappendiceal abscesses. Before the operation, 2.5 ml of SonoVue® contrast agent was injected intravenously to determine the non-enhanced area of liquefaction and necrosis in the abscess cavity. The puncture sites were selected. Percutaneous catheterization and drainage (PCD) were performed under contrast-enhanced ultrasound guidance. After the operation, 1 ml of diluted SonoVue® suspension was injected through the drainage tube to observe the position of the drainage tube, the degree of drainage and the development of the abscess.

RESULTS

An ultrasound contrast agent was used preoperatively to assess the extent of the abscess. Liquefaction and necrosis were observed in the abscess cavity. CEUS showed hyperenhancement in the wall of the abscess in the arterial phase and the liquefied necrotic area in the abscess cavity was not enhanced before PCD. CEUS allowed operators to confidently identify the puncture site. Amongst the 30 cases of PCD, 27 cases showed the clear positioning of the drainage tube. The head of the drainage tube was placed in the ideal position and development could be seen in the abscess cavity. The diffusion effect of the contrast agent was good with no spillover and the drainage was unobstructed. Abscess development was observed in 3 patients after puncture injection of the contrast agent but the head of the drainage tube was not in the predetermined position. After adjusting the position of the drainage tube, CEUS was repeated and showed a strong diffusion effect of the contrast agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous injection of Sonovue before PCD of periappendiceal abscesses can evaluate the extent of the abscess, liquefaction and necrosis in the abscess cavity. The approach can also provide guidance for the placement of the drainage tube. After the operation, a diluted contrast agent was injected through the drainage tube. The position of the drainage tube and the flow direction of the contrast agent could be seen. This approach has good value for clinical applications to accurately judge the position of the drainage tube.

Risk Factors of Recurrent Appendiceal Abscess after Initial Non-Surgical Treatment without Drainage of Children with Appendiceal Abscess: A Single Center Retrospective Review

Background: Exploration of the risk factors of recurrent appendiceal abscess after initial non-surgical treatment without drainage in children with appendiceal abscess. Patients and Methods: The medical records of all children diagnosed with appendiceal abscess and who were treated conservatively in the Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from June 2012 to June 2020 were collected. The collected cases were divided into the recurrent group and the non-recurrent group, and all clinical indicators were compared. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the risk factors for recurrent appendiceal abscess in children. Results: One hundred twenty-four patients were included and among them, 62 (50.0%) had clinical manifestations of recurrent appendiceal abscess (the recurrent group) and five patients (8%) suffered several instances of recurrence. Duration of intravenous antibiotic agents (odds ratio [OR], 0.905; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.820-1.000) was independently associated with the recurrence of appendiceal abscess. The risk of recurrence was increased in children with the white blood cell (WBC) count at discharge greater than 8 × 10⁹/L (OR, 2.702; 95% CI,1.172-6.231), the ratio of mass size to body surface area (BSA) at discharge greater than 4.255 (OR, 1.369; 95% CI, 1.104-1.697), and without continuous oral antibiotic agents after discharge (OR, 3.111; 95% CI, 1.240-7. 802). Conclusions: Interval appendectomy is recommended for children with WBC count at discharge greater than 8 × 10⁹/L, and the ratio of mass size to BSA at discharge greater than 4.255, because they are more likely to develop recurrent appendiceal abscess after initial conservative treatment. The duration of intravenous antibiotic agents is an independent factor of the recurrence of appendiceal abscess, and a longer course of intravenous antibiotic agents is strongly associated with a reduced risk of recurrence. Continued oral antibiotic agents after discharge can effectively reduce the risk of recurrence of appendiceal abscesses.

Characteristics of Patients Presented with Complicated Appendicitis in Adama, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Complicated appendicitis (CA) is defined as perforated appendicitis, peritonitis, peri-appendicular abscess, or appendicular mass. One-third of patients who develop appendicitis are diagnosed with CA at presentation. Studies regarding the prevalence of CA are lacking in low-income countries, and the characteristics of patients presented with CA are incoherently identified.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence and the significant characteristics associated with CA among patients admitted with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis at Adama Hospital Medical College.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 1, 2018, up to December 31, 2019. From a total of 1043 patients during the study period, the charts of 431 patients were selected using a systematic random sampling technique. Data were collected by a structured checklist. Bivariate and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were employed to assess the association of patients' characteristics with CA.

RESULTS

Out of 431 patients, 157 (36.4%) had CA. Characteristics of patients having a significant association with CA were found to be generalized abdominal tenderness (AOR: 27.48, 95% CI: 4.03, 187.24), diagnosis with peritonitis (AOR: 14.87, 95% CI: 4.05, 54.54), right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal mass (AOR: 7.79, 95% CI: 2.02, 29.99), shock (10.37, 95% CI: 3.18, 33.76), white blood cell (WBC) count >11,000 (AOR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.02, 4.61), onset to visit interval of 8-14 days (AOR: 10.45, 95% CI: 2.4, 45.52) and ultrasound report of acute appendicitis (AOR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.85), appendiceal abscess (AOR: 5.05, 95% CI: 1.48, 17.31), and appendiceal mass (AOR: 6.04, 95% CI: 1.45, 25.14).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of CA was very high. Generalized abdominal tenderness, RLQ abdominal mass, shock, WBC count, onset to visit interval, abdominopelvic ultrasound report, and clinical diagnosis of peritonitis were significantly associated with CA.

A rare case of appendiceal tip complete attachment to a sigmoid diverticulum: An appendiceal phlegmon case report

INTRODUCTION

Appendiceal phlegmon is defined as an inflammatory mass, consisting of the inflamed appendix, enclosed by adjacent viscera and the greater omentum in 2 % to 10 % of patients with acute appendicitis.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 24-year-old female presented to the hospital with chief complaints of fever, nausea, vomiting, and pain over the right lower quadrant of the abdomen for two days. In the local examination, tenderness and rebound tenderness were detected. Ultrasonography and abdominal CT scan indicated appendiceal phlegmon. After seven weeks of receiving a course of antibiotics with complete resolution of her symptoms, she underwent elective laparoscopic appendectomy. During surgery, the appendiceal tip was completely attached and fused to a sigmoid diverticulum, which has not been reported elsewhere. The appendix was completely removed, and the patient was discharged from the hospital in a good general condition after two days.

DISCUSSION

Acute appendicitis can cause serious complications, such as ruptured appendix, abscess, or phlegmon. In most cases, inflammation and infection resolve by antibiotic administration. In some cases perforation of the inflamed appendix and local abscess or diffuse peritonitis formation, which requires immediate percutaneous drainage or surgery as indicated. Theoretically, the inflamed appendix can cause adhesive damage to the adjacent organs; however, there is no particular report on this type of damage.

CONCLUSION

This rare case suggests that during phlegmon formation and related inflammation, other complications such as fistula formation, are theoretically expected.

Protocolized management of pediatric complicated appendicitis leads to improved outcomes

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate a complicated appendicitis clinical practice guideline at our institution.

METHODS

Records were compared before and after protocol implementation. We standardized an ED consult pathway, antibiotic use and need for early appendectomy (EA) versus interval appendectomy (IA). We evaluated demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare patients with small abscess treated with IA pre-protocol versus similar patients treated by EA post-protocol.

RESULTS

In total 246 patients were reviewed (Pre-protocol = 152, Post-protocol = 94). Pre-protocol early appendectomy rate was 51% versus 82% on post-protocol patients. There were no differences in demographics. Post-protocol the use of preoperative imaging significantly decreased (Pre 92% vs. 56%, p = 0.0001), as well as the use of discharge antibiotics (Pre 93% vs. Post 27%, p = 0.0001) with no change in abscess rate. Overall, post-protocol patients had fewer total CT scans performed (Pre 40% vs. Post 28%, p = 0.03) and decreased total length of stay (Pre 7.7 vs. Post 6.5 days, p = 0.049). On subgroup analysis, post-protocol EA with no or small abscess had lower median number of admissions, decreased total LOS (Pre IA 9 days vs. Post EA 5 days, p = 0.00001) and fewer complications (Pre IA 42% vs. EA 22%, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The establishment of a standardized pediatric complicated appendicitis protocol may lead to improved outcomes and resource utilization. Patients presenting with no or small abscess may be the least likely to benefit from interval appendectomy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio may contribute to the prediction of postoperative infectious complications in patients with acute appendicitis: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have assessed various clinical variables to identify risk factors for postoperative complications in patients with acute appendicitis. However, few studies have focused on the relationships between systemic inflammatory variables and postoperative complications in patients with acute appendicitis. We investigated the relationships between postoperative complications and systemic inflammatory variables, and assessed the clinical utility of these variables as predictors of postoperative complications in patients with acute appendicitis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 181 patients who underwent immediate appendectomy for acute appendicitis. All postoperative complications were classified as infectious or noninfectious, and we evaluated the relationships between postoperative complications and clinical factors including the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio.

RESULTS

In total, 28 patients (15.5%) had postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II-IV complications; 17 patients (9.4%) and 11 patients (6.1%) were categorized as the infectious and noninfectious complication groups, respectively. The cutoff value of the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for all complications was 11.3, and multivariate analysis revealed that the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was an independent predictor of any postoperative complication (odds ratio: 4.223, 95% confidence interval: 1.335-13.352; P = 0.014). The cutoff value of the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for infectious complications was 11.4, and multivariate analysis revealed that the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was an independent predictor of infectious complications (odds ratio: 4.235, 95% confidence interval: 1.137-15.776; P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute appendicitis, the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio may be a useful predictor of all postoperative complications, especially infectious complications.

A Retrospective Analysis of Conservative Management Versus Early Surgical Intervention in Appendicular Lump

Introduction

Acute appendicitis happens to be increasingly common in school-going children and early part of adult life, peak incidence reaching in the teens and early twenties. Luminal obstruction of the vermiform appendix is thought to be essential for the development of appendicular ischemia, gangrene, and perforation. The treatment of choice in acute appendicitis is emergency appendectomy. Appendicitis particularly puts the surgeon in a dilemma whenever the patient presents late by around four to seven days. In case of delay in presentation, complications like appendicular lump formation occur. The factors that make the clinical presentation inconsistent which in turn makes the diagnosis challenging in the case of acute appendicitis are the variable position of the appendix, the degree/grade of inflammation, and the age of the patient.

At present, the standard treatment is the Ochsner-Sherren regimen universalized by Oschner and has been mostly practised over many decades as the standard care for the appendicular lump. Conservative regimen does not work in a few cases where urgent surgical exploration is necessary. This study was conducted to compare early appendectomy versus conservative management followed by interval appendectomy in case of appendicular mass and to make a better strategy for effective management of patients with complicated appendicitis.

Methods

A total of 112 patients were diagnosed as having an appendicular lump as per the available records between June 2018 and June 2021. The total study population was divided into two comparative groups depending upon the treatment they received. The patients in group-1 received medical treatment and those in group-2 had undergone surgical management. The patients in group-1 were treated according to the Ochsner-Sherren regimen. The patients in group-2 were the patients in whom emergency appendectomy was done. If the general condition of the patient did not improve, pain and tenderness didn’t subside, the size of phlegmon or abscess was increasing and other features of the acute abdomen were persistent, then it was regarded as a failure of medical treatment and the patient was prepared for surgery on an emergency basis.

Results

Out of 1192 cases of acute appendicitis admitted between June 2018 and June 2021, a total of 112 patients were diagnosed with an appendicular lump. As per the record, 64 patients were managed conventionally as per the Ochsner-Sherren regimen followed by elective interval appendectomy (group-1) and 48 cases were managed with an emergency surgical procedure (group-2).

In group-1, out of 64 patients, non-operative treatment was successful in 58 patients (90.62%). Among the remaining patients, there was a failure of non-operative treatment in six patients and they were subjected to emergency surgical exploration (9.37%). So a total of 58 patients underwent interval appendectomy after six weeks. Out of 54 patients who had undergone emergency appendectomy in both groups, the per-operative finding was an appendicular lump in 55.5% of patients while a total of 44 patients in group-2, were discharged from the hospital within six days (91.66%). But in group-1, only 16 patients were discharged from the hospital within six days (25%), rest were discharged from the hospital after more than seven days of stay.

Conclusion

Early appendectomy in appendicular mass is safe due to the improvements in surgical techniques and better postoperative care.

Acute appendicitis–advances and controversies

Being one of the most common causes of the acute abdomen, acute appendicitis (AA) forms the bread and butter of any general surgeon’s practice. With the recent advancements in AA’s management, much controversy in diagnostic algorithms, possible differential diagnoses, and weighing the management options has been generated, with no absolute consensus in the literature. Since Alvarado described his eponymous clinical scoring system in 1986 to stratify AA risk, there has been a burgeoning of additional scores for guiding downstream management and mortality assessment. Furthermore, advancing literature on the role of antibiotics, variations in appendicectomy, and its adjuncts have expanded the surgeon’s repertoire of management options. Owing to the varied presentation, diagnostic tools, and management of AA have also been proposed in special groups such as pregnant patients, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. This article seeks to raise the critical debates about what is currently known about the above aspects of AA and explore the latest controversies in the field. Considering the ever-evolving coronavirus disease 2019 situation worldwide, we also discuss the pandemic’s repercussions on patients and how surgeons’ practices have evolved in the context of AA.

Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Following Appendectomy in Adulthood

Background: The appendix has a complicated immune function, and appendectomy may derange the immune system. Studies on the relationship between appendectomy and subsequent inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have been inconsistent. We conducted a nationwide cohort study consisting of individuals who underwent appendectomy to evaluate the incidence and risk of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).

Methods: We identified patients aged >20 years who underwent appendectomy between 2000 and 2012 from inpatient claims of the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) and assigned them to the appendectomy cohort. Then, we randomly selected patients without appendectomy in the NHIRD and assigned them to the comparison cohort in a frequency-matched 1:1 ratio based on sex, age, and index year. We tracked down all participants until IBD diagnosis, death, or the end of 2013. Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare the IBD risk between the appendectomy and comparison cohorts.

Results: The appendectomy and comparison cohorts in the study consisted of 246 562 patients each. The appendectomy cohort exhibited a 2.23- and 3.48-fold higher risk of UC (adjusted HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.59-3.12) and CD (adjusted HR = 3.48, 95% CI = 2.42-4.99), respectively, than did the comparison cohort. UC and CD risks significantly increased in the appendectomy cohort regardless of whether appendicitis was present.

Conclusions: Our study suggests that appendectomy increases UC and CD risks irrespective of appendicitis.

Risk of appendiceal neoplasm after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management is often the treatment of choice in cases of complicated appendicitis and routine interval appendectomy is not usually recommended. Actually, recent studies show an alarming number of appendiceal neoplasms following interval appendectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of appendiceal neoplasms and their histological types after interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in adults.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Studies reporting appendiceal neoplasm rates after interval appendectomy and histopathological characteristics were included. The most recent World Health Organization (WHO) classification of malignant tumours was considered. A pooled prevalence analysis for both prevalence and pathology was performed.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies was included: seven retrospective series and one randomized controlled trial. The pooled prevalence of neoplasms after interval appendectomy was 11% (95% CI 7-15; I² = 37.5%, p = 0.13). Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms occurred in 43% (95% CI 19-68), adenocarcinoma in 29% (95% CI 6-51), appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm in 21% (95% CI 6-36), globet cell carcinoma in 13% (95% CI -2-28), adenoma or serrated lesions in 20% (95% CI -0-41) of cases.

CONCLUSION

The risk of appendiceal neoplasm in patients treated with interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is 11%; mucinous neoplasm is the most common histopathological type. Further studies should investigate this association in order to clarify the biological pathway and clinical implications.

Is Emergency Appendicectomy Better Than Elective Appendicectomy for the Treatment of Appendiceal Phlegmon?: A Review

Appendiceal phlegmon is considered to be sequelae to acute appendicitis which presents as an appendiceal mass composed of the inflamed appendix, the adjacent bowel loops, and the greater omentum. The definitive diagnosis can be obtained by a CT scan of the abdomen. Though conservative management was the most practiced approach, recent studies have shifted the trends towards immediate appendicectomy for the management of appendiceal phlegmon. Thus, the management of appendiceal phlegmon has been debatable. Evidence to support this review was gathered via the PubMed database as this database uses the Medline, PubMed Central, and NLM databases and also offers a quick diverse search with up-to-date citations and numerous open-access free articles focused on Medicine. We did not include other databases like Google Scholar, Embase, and Scopus due to its limited access to free articles, recent articles, and citation information. Search terms used were combinations of "Appendicitis," "Appendiceal phlegmon", "Appendiceal phlegmon (AND) appendicectomy ". The resultant studies were reviewed and cross‐referenced for additional reports. Emergency appendicectomy is defined as appendicectomy carried out during the same, initial admission. An elective or interval appendicectomy is an appendicectomy carried out four to six weeks after the initial episode at a later admission. The interval is bridged by antibiotics and conservative management. Emergency appendicectomy is considered to have a higher rate of complications when compared to conservative management for appendiceal phlegmon. However, interval appendicectomy requires multiple re-admissions, leads to delayed diagnosis of any underlying pathology, and an increased risk of recurrent appendicitis. In our review, we aimed to compare and contrast the effectiveness of the different treatment modalities available for appendiceal phlegmon. Though the meta-analyses showed an increased association of complications with emergency appendicectomy, they included studies conducted before the laparoscopic era. Emergency appendicectomy decreases the financial burden, re-admission rate, and aids in the early diagnosis of any underlying pathology. In the laparoscopic era, we can consider the shifting trends towards emergency appendicectomy for the management of appendiceal phlegmon.

Appendiceal phlegmon in adults: Do we know how to manage it yet?

A Best Evidence Topic in general surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'Appendiceal phlegmon in adults: Do we know how to manage it yet?'. Altogether 217 papers were found on Ovid Embase and Medline, 334 on PubMed and 13 on the Cochrane database using the reported search. From the screened articles, 5 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that the best management method is conservative only treatment without interval appendicectomy. These patients must be followed up, including colonoscopy and/or CT imaging as indicated, to investigate for conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease or malignancy masquerading as appendicitis.

Is interval appendectomy really needed? A closer look at neoplasm rates in adult patients undergoing interval appendectomy after complicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The treatment algorithm for appendicitis is evolving, with recent interest in non-operative management. However, the safety of non-operative management for patients with complicated appendicitis has been questioned due to concern for increased risk of occult appendiceal neoplasm in this patient population. Our study aims to determine the rate of neoplasms discovered during interval appendectomy for patients with complicated appendicitis and determine the necessity of interval appendectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted on interval appendectomies performed in adult patients for complicated appendicitis at our institution over a 9-year period. Interval appendectomy was defined as appendectomy delayed from initial presentation with appendicitis. Complicated appendicitis was defined as perforation, phlegmon, and/or abscess as seen on computed tomography at time of presentation.

RESULTS

We identified 402 patients who underwent interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. A total of 36 appendiceal neoplasms were discovered on final pathology with an overall neoplasm rate of 9%. Patients with an appendiceal neoplasm were significantly older (56.6 years vs 45.1 years, p < 0.01). No patients under the age of 30 had a neoplasm. The rate of appendiceal neoplasms in patients 30 years and older was 11%. The rate for patients 50 years and older was 16%. For patients 80 years and older, the rate of appendiceal neoplasm was 43%.

CONCLUSION

The risk of occult appendiceal neoplasm is low in patients under the age of 30; however, there was an 11% rate of appendiceal neoplasm in patients 30 years and older. The risk increases with increased age, with a 16% risk in patients 50 years and older. Given these findings, we recommend consideration of interval appendectomy in all patients 30 years and older with complicated appendicitis.

Nonoperative management of periappendiceal abscess in children: A comparison of antibiotics alone versus antibiotics plus percutaneous drainage

PURPOSE

To determine the optimal nonoperative management of periappendiceal abscess in a pediatric population, we compared the therapeutic efficacy and cost-effectiveness of antibiotics alone versus antibiotics plus percutaneous drainage (PD).

METHODS

We conducted a 10-year retrospective chart review of pediatric patients less than 18 years of age who had acute perforated appendicitis complicated by periappendiceal abscess. Group 1 consisted of patients (N = 35) who received nonoperative management with antibiotics only. Group 2 consisted of patients (N = 11) who underwent PD and also received antibiotics. Group 1 was subdivided into groups 1A and 1B. Group 1A consisted of patients (N = 25) who responded to antibiotics treatment. Group 1B consisted of patients (N = 10) who were initially treated with antibiotics but subsequently required PD. Patients' demographics, initial clinical presentation, abscess size and location, length of hospital stay, outcome, and complications were compared among these groups.

RESULTS

Median hospital stay of group 1A and group 2 was identical at 6 days. Group 1B had a significantly longer median hospital stay of 13 days. There were no deaths and no significant long-term complications in any group. One patient in group 1A returned to the emergency room (ER) for abdominal pain and was readmitted for observation. Four patients in group 1B returned to the ER shortly after discharge and required readmission. One of these 4 patients developed acute pancreatitis in addition to enlarging abscess and underwent surgical drainage. There were no documented failures or complications of treatment in group 2 prior to interval appendectomy with the exception of 1 patient lost to follow-up. The presence of small bowel obstruction at the time of admission was an independent predictor of increased length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic therapy alone can be effective in a majority of patients and is recommended as initial management. To prevent potential complications and increased cost, PD should not be delayed if clinical symptoms persist or the abscess remains unchanged. Reimaging 6 days after initiation of antibiotic therapy with ultrasound or MRI is recommended to identify patients who would progress on antibiotics alone or who need to receive drainage without delay.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

South Coast appendicular mass management (SCAM) survey

Background

Management of appendicular mass and interval appendicectomy remains a controversial issue. Recent publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) reported the incidence of around 20% neoplastic lesions in the age group of more than forty years among the interval appendicectomy group against magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance only which led to trial termination. The objective of this study is to evaluate the current practice of the management of appendicular mass in five major hospitals of South Coast of the England.

Methods

A proforma was designed and emailed to the general surgical department of five hospitals in the South Coast of England. The proforma completion rate and compliance were improved by direct telephone call to the on-call registrars and consultants to collect data.

Results

Fifty-three surgeons (22 consultants, 27 ST3-ST8 grade surgical trainees and 4 SAS grades) completed the proforma. The clinical, hematological and computerized tomography (CT) based diagnostic criteria, and in-patient intravenous antibiotics (IV ABTXs) in addition to the radiological drainage in amenable cases for appendicular mass/abscess were mostly agreed initial management plan among surgeons. Normalization of inflammatory markers and radiological resolution were agreed discharge indicators. Agreed follow up investigations were CT scan (by 23%), Colonoscopy (by 13%), and both CT and colonoscopy (by 57%) after discharging patients. Only 17% surgeons offered planned interval appendicectomy and 62% surgeons offered interval appendectomy in selective cases of appendicular mass within 6 weeks to 6 months after discharge.

Conclusions

South Coast appendicular mass management (SCAM) survey confirms diverse practice to manage appendicular mass/abscess among surgeons working in South Coast hospitals. A substantial percentage of surgeons do not offer interval appendectomy to patients potentially leaving neoplastic lesions in situ.

Intermediate-term evaluation of interval appendectomy in the pediatric population

BACKGROUND

Initial non-operative management of children with complicated appendicitis has been well studied but when comparing emergency procedures the long-term effectiveness of interval appendectomy remains undefined. This study aimed to determine the effects of interval appendectomy from the perspective of long-term follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with complicated appendicitis between 2010 and 2017 was performed. The medical records of 471 patients with initial non-operative therapy and 377 patients treated with emergency appendectomy who served as controls were reviewed. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for any potential selection bias in the two strategies. A comparison of the clinical outcomes, including short- and long-term postoperative complications, was conducted in the 348 matched patients.

RESULTS

On presentation, there were no differences in age, weight, sex distribution, white blood cell (WBC), or procalcitonin (PCT) between the two groups, except for days of symptoms. The patients undergoing emergency appendectomy had a high American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score (p = 0.002). The patients who underwent initial non-operative therapy had a lower complication rate, including surgical wound infection [odds ratio (OR), 3.77; 95% CI 2.59-5.50; p < 0.001) and postoperative peritonitis or abscess (OR, 3.81; 95% CI 1.79-8.12; p < 0.001) than those who underwent emergency appendectomy. Furthermore, the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) was lower in patients who underwent initial non-operative therapy than in patients who underwent emergency appendectomy (OR, 4.6; 95% CI 0.99-21.41; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial non-operative therapy with interval appendectomy was feasible for most patients with appendiceal abscesses and had advantages in terms of postoperative complications, especially regarding long-term obstruction events. Therefore, initial non-operative therapy with interval appendectomy should be considered the first treatment of choice for pediatric patients with complicated appendicitis.

Comparison of treatment methods of appendiceal mass and abscess: A prospective Cohort Study

Background

The aim of our prospective study is to compare and analyze the results of two treatment methods of appendiceal mass and abscess: emergency surgery and conservative treatment with and without interval surgery.

Materials and methods

74 Patients with the diagnosis of appendiceal mass or abscess were enrolled in this study. The patients were assigned into two groups: the emergency surgery group and the conservative management group. The conservative management group was subdivided into two groups: interval surgery group and the ambulatory follow-up observation group without interval surgery. Several clinical characteristics were determined and compared between the groups. Among patients who underwent surgery, the surgical methods, operation time, postoperative hospitalization period, and post-surgical complications were analyzed. In the ambulatory follow-up observation group, recurrence of appendicitis was assessed.

Results

Comparison of the emergency surgery group and interval surgery group revealed that the interval surgery group was characterized by shorter operation time (P = 0.008), a smallernumber of postoperative complications (P = 0.02) and also shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.009). In the ambulatory follow-up observation group, recurrence of appendicitis developed in 3 (13%) patients. US or CT-guided PCD was performed in all 3 patients on the conservative treatment stage. Comparing the interval surgery and recurrent appendicitis groups revealed statistically significant difference: operation time (P = 0.04) as well as postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.04) were shorter in recurrent appendicitis group. In 3 (4.1%) patients, the cause of the appendiceal mass was caecal cancer (2 cases) and Crohn's disease.

Conclusion

Conservative treatment without interval surgery seems to be the preferred method for treatment of appendiceal mass and abscess. Patients can be operated on only in case of recurrence of appendicitis. US or CT PCD of appendiceal abscess presents the risk-factor for the development of recurrence of appendicitis. CT and colonoscopy within 4–6 weeks after completing the conservative treatment is recommended to be performed in all patients.

•

Conservative treatment without interval surgery should be the method of choice for treatment of appendiceal mass and abscess.

•

Patients should be operated only in case of recurrence of appendicitis.

•

US or CT PCD of appendiceal abscess present the risk-factor for the development of recurrence of appendicitis.

•

All patients should be performed CT and colonoscopy in 4–6 weeks after completing the conservative treatment.

Complicated appendicitis and considerations for interval appendectomy

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Of the 300,000 appendectomies performed each year, 25% are due to complicated appendicitis. This article reviews the incidence and pathophysiology of acute appendicitis, the nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis, and the rationales for and against interval appendectomy.

Acute Appendicectomy or Conservative Treatment for Complicated Appendicitis (Phlegmon or Abscess)? A Systematic Review by Updated Traditional and Cumulative Meta-Analysis

Background

The existing evidence on the treatment of complicated appendicitis favors conservative treatment rather than acute appendicectomy. Update traditional meta-analysis and consequently cumulative meta-analysis was performed to track the accumulation of evidence over time.

Methods

Studies were identified by a systematic literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases. The main outcome measures were duration of the first hospitalization, overall duration of hospitalization, duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment, overall complications, abdominal/pelvic abscesses, wound infections, re-admissions and unplanned re-operations.

Results

Overall complications, abdominal/pelvic abscesses, wound infections and unplanned procedures were significantly lower in the conservative treatment cohort. In contrast, subgroup analysis of three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) revealed no significant difference in abdominal/pelvic abscesses (odds ratio (OR): 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.17 - 1.29, P = 0.14). No significant differences were found in the duration of the first and overall hospitalizations. Of the note, high-quality RCTs demonstrated a shorter hospital stay by 1 day for the laparoscopic appendicectomy cohort compared to conservative treatment (mean difference (MD): -0.99, 95% CI: -1.31 to -0.67, P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The present meta-analysis demonstrates that a shift in paradigm has begun, with a more widespread use of the laparoscopic approach for the management of complicated appendicitis.

Women who had appendectomy have increased risk of systemic lupus erythematosus: a nationwide cohort study

The appendix is involved in immune function, and an appendectomy may alter the immune system. Studies evaluating the relationship between previous appendectomy and the risk of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are lacking. This nationwide cohort study investigated the incidence and risk of SLE in patients who underwent appendectomy. Patients aged > 20 years who received appendectomy from 2000 to 2011 were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database and assigned to the appendectomy cohort. Patients without appendectomy were randomly selected from the NHIRD and assigned to the control cohort; they were frequency matched to each study patient at a 4:1 ratio by sex, age, and index year. All patients were followed until SLE diagnosis, withdrawal from the National Health Insurance program, or the end of 2011. We used Cox models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) to compare the risk of SLE between the appendectomy and control cohorts. From 23.74 million people in the cohort, 80,582 patients undergoing appendectomy and 323,850 patients without appendectomy were followed for 723,438 and 2,931,737 person-years, respectively. The appendectomy cohort had a 2.04-fold higher risk of SLE than the control cohort (adjusted HR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.52-2.76). Women aged ≤ 49 years who underwent appendectomy had a 2.27-fold higher risk of SLE than the corresponding controls (adjusted HR = 2.27, 95% CI = 1.62-3.19). Women aged ≤ 49 years who underwent appendectomy have a significantly higher risk of SLE.

Prediction of Negative Outcomes in Non-Surgical Treatment for Appendiceal Abscess in Adults

OBJECTIVES

Non-surgical treatment is an acceptable approach for managing appendiceal abscess in adults. However, it is only applicable for selected patients, and conversion to surgery is mandatory for failed conservative treatment. This study aimed to determine the predictive factors for unsuccessful outcomes.

METHODS

Of 594 patients with acute appendicitis, 34 (5.7%) diagnosed with appendiceal abscess were initially treated conservatively. Patients were divided into two groups: the conservative group, which was successfully treated with antibiotics and percutaneous abscess drainage, and the conversion group, which comprised patients who had surgical conversion despite conservative treatment. Risk factors for the conversion group were investigated by comparing clinical and radiological parameters between the two groups.

RESULTS

Eight (23.4%) patients were converted to surgical management at an average of 5.5 days of non-surgical treatment. An abscess size greater than 40 mm and a lower rate of improvement in the white blood cell (WBC) count were significant factors for predicting conversion in multivariate analysis. The conversion group had a long operative time and high morbidity and operative conversion rates (change of proposed initial operation). Early conversion to operation group, i.e., less than 5 days of treatment, contributed to a significantly shorter hospital stay, lower hospital cost, and relatively shorter operative time (p = 0.02, p = 0.04, and p = 0.11, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Contributing factors in predicting unsuccessful outcomes for non-surgical treatment include an abscess size greater than 40 mm and a low rate of improvement in WBC count on the first day of antibiotic treatment.

Minimally Invasive Treatment for Appendiceal Mass Formed After Acute Perforated Appendicitis

The optimal treatment for appendiceal mass formed after appendiceal rupture due to acute appendicitis is surrounded with controversy. The treatment strategy ranges from open surgery (emergency or interval appendectomy), laparoscopic appendectomy, and image-guided drainage, to conservative treatment with or without antibiotics. Nonsurgical treatment (including conservative and drainage treatment), followed by interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence, is the traditional management of these patients. The need for interval appendectomy after a successful conservative or/and image-guided drainage treatment, has recently been questioned as the risk of recurrence is relatively small. Several authors consider that even in cases involving only ambulatory follow-up observation, without interval surgery after conservative management, the recurrence rate and risks of missing underlying pathologies were not high. This article evaluates the minimally invasive treatment modalities in the management of appendiceal mass, risk of undetected serious disease, and the need for interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence.

Malignant Tumours Mimicking Complicated Appendicitis and Discovered upon Follow-Up after Percutaneous Drainage: A Case of Two Patients

The conservative management of periappendiceal abscesses is gaining favour due to decreased morbidity and improved clinical outcomes for patients. Occasionally however an abscess can mask underlying sinister pathology. In this article, we highlight two cases of appendiceal adenocarcinoma that were initially diagnosed as periappendiceal abscesses and managed conservatively with percutaneous drainage. We also discuss clinical and imaging features that may assist with identifying a hidden malignancy when presented in these situations.

Complicated acute appendicitis presenting as an abscess in the abdominal wall in an elderly patient: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Appendicitis is a common cause of acute abdomen; however, the classic clinical signs are not often present, and it has unusual presentations. Thus, its diagnosis can be challenging.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

We describe the case of an elderly man who presented with right abdominal wall abscess with spontaneous drainage in the emergency department. Since we suspected a subjacent abdominal pathology, we performed surgery, and intraoperatively, we observed that the Appendix tip had invaded the abdominal wall.

DISCUSSION

This patient had a challenging diagnostic process and surgical visualization of the appendicular tip invading the abdominal wall was an important characteristic in proving the cause of the abdominal wall abscess.

CONCLUSION

The onset of an abdominal wall abscess without a known cause needs to be thoroughly investigated, with consideration of a subjacent abdominal cause and appendicitis necessitatis.

C-reactive Protein may Predict the Recurrence of Appendicitis in Children Formerly with Appendiceal Mass after Successful Non-operative Treatment

BACKGROUND

This study identified factors associated with the recurrence of appendicitis in children with appendiceal masses after successful nonsurgical treatment.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, children who were diagnosed as having appendiceal masses after undergoing conservative treatment between 2000 and 2014 were enrolled and the medical records of those who did not undergo an interval appendectomy were reviewed. The clinical features and outcomes of patients with and those without recurrent appendicitis were compared. Regression analysis was used to identify risk factors of appendicitis recurrence.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included and successfully discharged after receiving nonsurgical treatment for appendiceal masses. Of the patients, 35 (50.0%) developed recurrent appendicitis and 85.7% (30/35) recurrences developed within 3 months. Multivariate analyses showed that patients with a higher serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and peritonitis more frequently developed recurrence. The appendicitis recurrence rate was significantly higher in the patients with CRP levels of ≥103 mg/L with an odds ratio of 16.9 or in those with peritonitis with an odds ratio of 4.9.

CONCLUSION

Children with appendiceal masses who develop peritonitis or have CRP levels of ≥103 mg/L have a higher recurrence rate of appendicitis and should undergo an interval appendectomy.

Impact of high-grade obstruction on outcomes in patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses managed by nonoperative treatment

Purpose

To retrospectively assess the impact of high-grade obstructions identified on initial CT on outcomes of patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses managed by nonoperative treatment.

Methods

Institutional Review Boards approved this retrospective study and informed consent was waived. Included were 52 consecutive patients diagnosed with appendiceal inflammatory masses by CT scan and managed by nonoperative treatment. The main outcome measure was treatment failure and secondary outcomes were complications and initial and total hospital stay. Patient demographics, inflammatory markers, and CT findings for presence of an appendiceal inflammatory mass and high-grade obstruction were assessed. Patients with and without high-grade obstruction were compared for patient characteristics and outcomes using Fisher exact test and Student t-test.

Results

Among 52 patients, 14 (27%) had high-grade obstruction on CT examination at presentation. No significant differences were observed in patient characteristics (P > 0.05), treatment failure (P = 0.33), complications (P = 0.29), or initial (P = 0.73) or total (P = 0.72) hospitalization between patients with and without high-grade obstruction.

Conclusion

For patients who were managed by nonoperative treatment for appendiceal inflammatory masses, the presence of high-grade obstruction identified on initial CT scan did not significantly affect outcomes of treatment failure, complications, and initial and total hospitalization.

Management of Appendiceal Mass and Abscess. An 11-Year Experience

The aim of our study is to compare the results of emergency surgery versus conservative treatment with interval surgery in patients diagnosed with appendiceal mass and abscess. A retrospective review of 48 patients with appendiceal mass and abscess treated from January 2002 to January 2013 at General Surgery Department of Kipshidze Central University Hospital was performed. Patients with emergency surgery were compared to patients treated by nonoperative management with interval surgery. Demographics, clinical profile, and operative outcomes were studied. The emergency surgery group included 25 patients, and the interval surgery group included 23 patients. The clinical characteristics of the emergency surgery and interval surgery groups were not statistically different. In the emergency surgery group, an open appendectomy was performed on 17 patients, and colonic resections (ileocecectomy or right hemicolectomy) were performed on 8 patients. In the interval surgery group, an open appendectomy was performed on 21 patients, and colonic resections were performed on 2 patients. There were no statistical differences in types of surgery, postoperative complications, operation time without colonic resections, and postoperative hospitalization period among these 2 groups. Operation time with colonic resections was of greater duration in the emergency surgery group than in the interval surgery group (P = 0.04). Both treatment methods for appendiceal mass and abscess have the same results. The surgeon must consider clinical symptoms and results of investigations in each particular case when choosing an appropriate treatment method. Prospective randomized controlled trials are required for comparing the results of all 3 treatment methods of appendiceal mass.

The evolving management of the appendix mass in the era of laparoscopy and interventional radiology

AIM

An appendix mass is the result of a walled-off perforation of the appendix which localises, resulting in a mass and it is encountered in up to 7% of patients presenting with acute appendicitis. However, its management is controversial due to the lack of high level evidence. This review article sets out a rationale diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for the appendix mass based upon up-to-date available evidence.

METHODS

A literature review of the investigation and management of appendix mass/complicated appendicitis was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

No prospective studies were identified. The great majority of recent evidence supports a conservative management approach avoiding urgent appendicectomy because of the high risk of major complications and bowel resection. Appendix abscesses over 5 cm in diameter and persistent abscesses should be drained percutaneously along with antibiotics. Appendix phlegmon should be treated with antibiotics alone. Surgery is reserved for patients who fail conservative treatment. Routine interval appendicectomy is not recommended, but should be considered in the context of persistent faecolith, ongoing right iliac fossa pain, recurrent appendicitis and appendix mass persistent beyond 2 weeks. Clinicians should be particularly wary of patients with appendix mass aged over 40 and those with features suggesting malignancy.

Contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in follow-up of inflammatory appendiceal mass: Preliminary results and review of the literature

Objective

We aimed to search the contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in follow-up of patients with acute appendicitis associated inflammatory appendiceal mass (IAM). DWI was used as a monitoring imaging method to assess the response of medical treatment.

Materials and methods

19 patients (mean age, 37+–13.1; age range, 19–69; M/F: 10/9), presented with clinical, laboratory and computed tomography (CT) findings suggestive of IAM were enrolled prospectively in this study. CT and DWI images were evaluated by two radiologists in consensus. b values 0, 500 and 1000 s/mm² were used, and DWI images were analysed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Laboratory parameters were C-reactive protein value and white blood cell count. During follow-up changes in the diameter of IMA and laboratory parameters were correlated with ADC values. Conservative treatment with interval appendectomy and a total conservative approach without surgery were the treatment options during follow-up.

Results

We found statistically significant correlation between the ADC values, maximum IAM diameter and laboratory parameters. During follow-up five surgical procedures were performed: one patient underwent surgery for cecal adenocarcinoma and four underwent interval appendectomy. One patient developed acute relapse of IAM at the sixth month of follow-up.

Conclusion

DWI may be used with a significant success for follow-up of patients with IAM. As a monitoring imaging method, DWI may also aid in determining of most appropriate timing for interval appendectomy as well as may help in diagnosing alternative diagnoses (e.g. malignancy and inflammatory bowel disease) that can mimic IAM.

Pyosalpinx causing acute appendicitis in a 32-year-old Cameroonian female: a case report

Background

Pyosalpinx as a cause of acute appendicitis is very rare. We report the first case of a right pyosalpinx causing an extrinsic compression of the appendiceal lumen and consequently an acute appendicitis following an obstruction.

Case presentation

A 32 year old female from the North west region of Cameroon, presented with an acute exacerbation of a mild chronic right iliac fossa pain over a 2 day duration. She underwent exploratory laparotomy and intraoperative findings were a bilateral pyosalpinx, with the right fallopian tube adhering to the caecum and the terminal ileum, and obstructing the lumen of an inflammed appendix. A classical appendectomy and a right salpingectomy were done. The post-operative period was uneventful and she returned after 2 weeks for a follow-up visit with no further complaints.

Conclusion

We describe to the best of our knowledge, the first case of an acute appendicitis caused by an extrinsic obstruction of the appendiceal lumen by a pyosalpinx. The close proximity of the caecum to the right fallopian tube most likely accounted for this occurrence. Although a rare entity, physicians should always keep in mind very rare causes of an acute appendicitis to guide management. This case highlights the shortcomings of pelvic ultrasonography in the diagnosis this condition. A pelvic computed tomography scanning should therefore be sought in case of a doubtful pelvic ultrasonography result. Finally, there is an urgent need to improve the awareness on sexually transmitted infections in our setting.

Pre-operative CT predictors associated with 30-day adverse events in patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses who underwent immediate appendectomies

PURPOSE

To retrospectively evaluate pre-operative CT predictors that are associated with 30-day adverse events in patients who underwent immediate appendectomies for appendiceal inflammatory masses.

METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board, and the requirement for informed consent was waived. One hundred forty-four consecutive patients who underwent immediate appendectomies and were diagnosed with appendiceal inflammatory masses by pre-operative CT from January 2005 to December 2013 at a tertiary hospital were included. The main outcome measure was 30-day adverse events. Patient demographics and data for inflammatory markers including leukocyte counts, segmented neutrophils, and C-reactive protein levels were collected by a single radiologist. Pre- and post-operative CT findings were evaluated for features of appendiceal inflammatory masses, associated findings, and post-operative adverse events by two radiologists in a blinded fashion with consensus to assess surgical and pathologic results, post-operative outcomes, and original CT interpretations. Appendiceal inflammatory masses were defined as complicated appendicitis with a phlegmon or an abscess that was identified on pre-operative CT exam. Factors associated with 30-day adverse events were assessed using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 22 (15%) of the 144 patients (mean age [±SD] 44.6 ± 22.0 years, range 3-97 years) experienced 30-day adverse events: ten intra-abdominal abscesses, three wound infections, two cases of peritonitis, two small bowel obstructions, two intra-abdominal abscesses with peritonitis, one intra-abdominal abscess with wound infection, one intra-abdominal abscess with small bowel obstruction, and one case of peritonitis with small bowel obstruction. In univariate analysis, the presence of appendicolith (odds ratio [OR] 2.49, p = 0.048) and high-grade obstruction (OR 3.79; p = 0.01) were associated with adverse events. High-grade obstruction (adjusted OR 3.05; p = 0.04) was the only independent pre-operative predictor associated with 30-day adverse events in patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses.

CONCLUSIONS

High-grade obstruction was an independent pre-operative CT predictor associated with 30-day adverse events in patients who underwent immediate appendectomies for appendiceal inflammatory masses.

Factors associated with failure of nonoperative treatment of complicated appendicitis in children

Appendicitis remains the most common cause for emergency abdominal surgery in children. Immediate appendectomy in complicated, perforated appendicitis can be hazardous and nonoperative therapy has been gaining use as an initial therapy in children. Previous studies have reported failure rates in nonoperative therapy in such cases ranging from 10% to 41%. Factors leading to treatment failures have been studied with various and disparate results. We reviewed our institutional experience in treated complicated appendicitis, with focus on those initially managed nonoperatively.

METHODS

Records of all children admitted with the diagnosis of perforated appendicitis to NYU Langone Medical Center and Bellevue Hospital Center from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2013 were reviewed. The diagnosis was made with ultrasound and/or computed tomography scan. Those with abscesses amenable to drainage underwent aspiration and drain placement by an interventional radiologist. Broad spectrum intravenous (IV) antibiotics were given until the patient became afebrile, pain free and tolerating a regular diet. Oral antibiotics were continued for an additional week and interval appendectomy was done eight weeks later. The primary outcome measure was treatment response with failure defined as those who did not improve or required readmission for additional IV antibiotics and/or early appendectomy. Multiple patient and treatment related variables, including those previously reported as predicting failure in nonoperative therapy, were studied. Continuous variables were reported as means ± standard error and compared using 2-tailed unpaired t tests; nonparametric variables were analyzed by Mann-Whitney U tests. Categorical variables were reported as medians ± interquartile ranges and compared using Chi-square testing. Statistical significance was accepted for p<.05.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were identified as undergoing initial nonoperative therapy. Fifty-two (81%) were categorized as treatment successes being treated nonoperatively and 12 (19%) were failures. Variables showing no significance in predicting treatment failures included duration of symptoms, presence of appendicolith, presence of phlegmon, presence of abscess, initial white blood cell count, and SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) positive. The variables that predicted failure of nonoperative therapy vs. successes were presence of bandemia (75% vs. 40%, p=0.052) and small bowel obstruction on imaging (42% vs. 15%, p=0.052) and presence of bandemia ≥15% which was highly predictive of failure (67% vs. 4%, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Predicting which patients with complicated perforated appendicitis will respond well to nonoperative therapy may allow us to more effectively treat patients with complicated perforated appendicitis. In our study the presence of small bowel obstruction and bandemia, especially ≥15% correlated with treatment failure; this suggests that these select patients may need a modified treatment strategy.

A Systematic Review of Perforated Appendicitis and Phlegmon: Interval Appendectomy or Wait-and-See?

Patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon have been traditionally managed with antibiotics and radiologically guided drainage of the abscess. Many studies have questioned the need for interval appendectomy. A systematic review of the nonsurgical treatment of patients with an appendiceal abscess or phlegmon was undertaken. The rate of recurrence after nonsurgical management, morbidity and length of hospital stay was measured. PubMed and Cochrane databases were queried to identify 21 studies reporting the morbidity of nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal phlegmon or abscess, and five studies reporting the morbidity of performing interval appendectomy. Repeat nonsurgical management was compared with that of performing interval appendectomy. The studies included a total of 1943 patients, of which 1400 patients were managed nonsurgically and 543 patients underwent interval appendectomy. Nonoperative treatment had a mean recurrence of 12.4 per cent, a morbidity of 13.3 per cent, and the length of hospital stay was 9.6 days. The mean morbidity rate and length of hospital stay for patients who underwent interval appendectomy was 10.4 per cent and 5.0 days, respectively. Interval appendectomy and repeat nonoperative management in case of recurrence are associated with similar morbidity; however, elective interval appendectomy implies additional operative costs to prevent recurrence in one of eight patients.

Appendectomy in women. Is the laparoscopic approach always better than the "open" approach in uncomplicated appendicitis?

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common emergency in abdominal surgery, but remains a continuing controversy regarding the most appropriate method of removing the inflamed appendix.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2012, 1037 women underwent appendectomy (average age: 25±15.7 y; range: 6 to 91 y). Of these, 519 underwent open appendectomy (OA) and 518 underwent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). For all the patients we determined the postoperative hospital stay, the eventual readmissions within 30 days after discharge, the length of surgical procedures (data were available only for the period from January 2008 to December 2012), the costs for the OA and LA, and the rate of negative appendicitis.

RESULTS

In our cohort of patients, 189 women (18.2%) had a negative appendectomy. Considering the postoperative hospital stay (average: 4.2±3.6 d; range: 1 to 32 d in OA group and average: 3.9±3.1 d; range: 1 to 21 d in LA group; P=0.15) there were no statistical differences between 2 groups. The average length of surgical procedures in LA group was 42.3±18.4 minutes (range: 8 to 135 min) and 43.2±19 minutes in the OA group (range: 10 to 135 min) (P=0.63). The average net cost of LA was 1203.61 euros, whereas for OA it was 95.18 euros. In this study, we considered only the surgical materials.

CONCLUSIONS

LAs are not associated with a lower complication rate than the OAs and, above all, LAs are more expensive than OAs. Also we believe that laparoscopic approach should be used only in case of unclear abdominal pain and not for the treatment of clear acute and uncomplicated appendicitis.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in high risk patients

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic appendectomy is widely used for the treatment of complicated appendicitis. Its use in patients with high operative risk is still on debate. The aim of the presented study was to investigate the benefits of laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with high peri- and postoperative risk factors.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent appendectomy in our center between 2006 and 2013. Patients were classified according to their preoperative risk (classification of the American Society of Anesthesia--ASA score). Only patients with ASA 3 and 4 were included and were divided into two groups--open appendectomy (OA group) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA group).

RESULTS

The operation time was slightly longer in the LA group (p = 0.05), but hospital stay was shorter (p = 0.05). Complications graded according to the Clavien Dindo classification were slightly more frequent in patients after LA, whereas severe complications occurred more frequently in patients after OA (p = 0.01). The postoperative WBC decreased steadily and significantly in patients after OA, whereas the decrease in patients after LA was delayed (p = 0.03). CRP slightly increased after OA and decreased thereafter, whereas it steadily decreased after LA (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic appendectomy can be recommended for patients with complicated appendicitis even with higher risk categories.

Inflammatory appendix mass in patients with acute appendicitis: CT diagnosis and clinical relevance

The purpose of our study was to analyze the clinical relevance of computerized tomography (CT) in providing the diagnosis of inflammatory appendix mass (IAM) in patients with acute appendicitis. The CT images of 134 patients were reviewed. Two groups of patients were made according to the presence (group 1; n = 21) or the absence (group 2; n = 113) of IAM. Clinical signs of patients, CT features, complications at surgery, and histological examinations were noted. Inter-observer agreement was assessed by using kappa statistics. Twenty-one patients presenting with CT features of IAM were diagnosed. An excellent inter-observer agreement (κ = 0.94) was assessed for the diagnosis of IAM. No significant statistical difference in the age distribution was observed between patients with IAM (mean age 55) and patients without (mean age 45) (p = 0.2232). No clinical sign showed a statistically significant association with the presence of IAM (p = 0.707) or with complication encountered at surgery (p = 0.180). Delay to CT examination was 5.4 days in patients presenting with CT features of IAM and of 1.7 days for patients presenting without (p = 0.0001). Conversely to acute appendicitis complicated by simple perforation (p = 0.153) or peri-appendicular abscess (p = 0.501), acute appendicitis presenting with IAM showed a statistically significant association with complications encountered at surgery (p = 0.0003) and the need for conversion to open surgery (p = 0.001). Performing CT in complicated acute appendicitis provides the diagnosis of IAM. Distinction of IAM appeared to be of clinical relevance, since immediate surgery in IAM was statistically associated with surgical complications and conversion to open surgery in our study.