1
|
Hussein Al-Obaidi J. Early appendectomy in appendicular mass. BIONATURA 2022. [DOI: 10.21931/rb/2022.07.04.67] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Appendicular mass is a well-known complication of acute appendicitis. It is conventionally treated conservatively, followed by interval appendectomy. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of an early appendectomy in appendicular mass. Patients and methods: The analysis was performed at the Department of Surgery Al-Shafaa Hospital Diyala from March 2017 to December 2021. The patients with appendicular mass (n = 100) were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups, viz. group A (n = 50) and group B (n = 50), regardless of age and gender. After preliminary investigations, appendectomy was performed in group A patients immediately. Group B patients were initially treated with the conventional procedure followed by interval appendectomy. Patient compliance, readmission and overall expenses were recorded for both groups. Results: A total of 60 (64%) males and 40 (40%) females with a mean age of 25.09 years (Range 8-44 years) are included in the study population. Post-operative wound sepsis occurred in 3 (6%) patients in group A. Treatment failure, patient compliance, readmission and overall expenses occurred in group B patients. Early appendectomy was a safe and superior option in patients with appendicular mass compared to conventional treatment.
Keywords: Acute appendicitis. Appendicular Mass, Conservative management, immediate surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaleel Hussein Al-Obaidi
- Al-kindy College of Medicine, Baghdad University, Iraq; 2 Medical director of Al-Shafa private hospital, Iraq
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hori T, Machimoto T, Kadokawa Y, Hata T, Ito T, Kato S, Yasukawa D, Aisu Y, Kimura Y, Sasaki M, Takamatsu Y, Kitano T, Hisamori S, Yoshimura T. Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23:5849-5859. [PMID: 28932077 PMCID: PMC5583570 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i32.5849] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2017] [Revised: 07/25/2017] [Accepted: 08/01/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Acute appendicitis (AA) develops in a progressive and irreversible manner, even if the clinical course of AA can be temporarily modified by intentional medications. Reliable and real-time diagnosis of AA can be made based on findings of the white blood cell count and enhanced computed tomography. Emergent laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is considered as the first therapeutic choice for AA. Interval/delayed appendectomy at 6-12 wk after disease onset is considered as unsafe with a high recurrent rate during the waiting time. However, this technique may have some advantages for avoiding unnecessary extended resection in patients with an appendiceal mass. Non-operative management of AA may be tolerated only in children. Postoperative complications increase according to the patient's factors, and temporal avoidance of emergent general anesthesia may be beneficial for high-risk patients. The surgeon's skill and cooperation of the hospital are important for successful LA. Delaying appendectomy for less than 24 h from diagnosis is safe. Additionally, a semi-elective manner (i.e., LA within 24 h after onset of symptoms) may be paradoxically acceptable, according to the factors of the patient, physician, and institution. Prompt LA is mandatory for AA. Fortunately, the Japanese government uses a universal health insurance system, which covers LA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tomohide Hori
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Takafumi Machimoto
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Yoshio Kadokawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Toshiyuki Hata
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Tatsuo Ito
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Shigeru Kato
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Daiki Yasukawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Yuki Aisu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Yusuke Kimura
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Maho Sasaki
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Yuichi Takamatsu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Taku Kitano
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Shigeo Hisamori
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| | - Tsunehiro Yoshimura
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tenriyorodusoudanjyo Hospital, Tenri, Nara 632-8552, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Darwazeh G, Cunningham SC, Kowdley GC. A Systematic Review of Perforated Appendicitis and Phlegmon: Interval Appendectomy or Wait-and-See? Am Surg 2016. [DOI: 10.1177/000313481608200107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ghaleb Darwazeh
- From the Department of Surgery, Saint Agnes Hospital, Baltimore, MD
| | | | - Gopal C. Kowdley
- From the Department of Surgery, Saint Agnes Hospital, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Castelló González M, Bueno Rodríguez JC, Hernández Moore E, Aguilar Atanay D. Predictors of recurrent appendicitis after non-operative management of children with perforated appendicitis presenting with an appendicular inflammatory mass. Arch Dis Child 2014; 99:154-7. [PMID: 24214939 DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2012-303400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
AIM To determine clinical and imaging predictors of recurrent appendicitis after non-operative management for children with perforated appendicitis presenting with an appendicular inflammatory mass. METHODS A case-control study was carried out of children with clinical and ultrasonographic diagnosis of an appendicular inflammatory mass. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or not of recurrent appendicitis (or predisposing pathological findings during interval appendectomy). Several clinical and imaging factors were compared between both groups using an independent and progressive analysis to identify which were the most relevant predictors. RESULTS The persistence of symptoms after resolution of the appendicular inflammatory mass, as well as its time of resolution (p<0.001), were the most relevant factors during group classification. The identification of an ultrasonographic image of an appendicolith and the initial size of the mass were also identified as independent predictors (p<0.018 and p<0.01). The presence of the first two factors in a patient was strongly associated with recurrent appendicitis. CONCLUSIONS Persistent symptoms after the recovery of the initial episode, associated with a slow resolution of the appendicular inflammatory mass, are indications for an interval appendectomy. A previous history of appendicitis or detection of an ultrasonographic image of an appendicolith is the other indication for an interval appendectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro Castelló González
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Pediatric Hospital "Dr. Eduardo Agramonte Piña", Camagüey, Cuba
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tannoury J, Abboud B. Treatment options of inflammatory appendiceal masses in adults. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19:3942-3950. [PMID: 23840138 PMCID: PMC3703180 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i25.3942] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2013] [Revised: 03/27/2013] [Accepted: 04/27/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
At present, the treatment of choice for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults continues to be surgical. The inflammation in acute appendicitis may sometimes be enclosed by the patient's own defense mechanisms, by the formation of an inflammatory phlegmon or a circumscribed abscess. The management of these patients is controversial. Immediate appendectomy may be technically demanding. The exploration often ends up in an ileocecal resection or a right-sided hemicolectomy. Recently, the conditions for conservative management of these patients have changed due to the development of computed tomography and ultrasound, which has improved the diagnosis of enclosed inflammation and made drainage of intra-abdominal abscesses easier. New efficient antibiotics have also given new opportunities for nonsurgical treatment of complicated appendicitis. The traditional management of these patients is nonsurgical treatment followed by interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence. The need for interval appendectomy after successful nonsurgical treatment has recently been questioned because the risk of recurrence is relatively small. After successful nonsurgical treatment of an appendiceal mass, the true diagnosis is uncertain in some cases and an underlying diagnosis of cancer or Crohn's disease may be delayed. This report aims at reviewing the treatment options of patients with enclosed appendiceal inflammation, with emphasis on the success rate of nonsurgical treatment, the need for drainage of abscesses, the risk of undetected serious disease, and the need for interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence.
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
Neoplasms are an uncommon finding after appendectomy, with malignant tumors occurring in less than 1% of the surgical specimens, and carcinoid being the most frequent malignancy. A negative or inconclusive ultrasound is not adequate to rule out appendicitis and should be followed by CT scan. For pregnant patients, MRI is a reasonable alternative to CT scan. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics is safe as an initial treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis, with a significant decrease in complications but a high failure rate. Open and laparoscopic appendectomies for appendicitis provide similar results overall, although the laparoscopic technique may be advantageous for obese and elderly patients but may be associated with a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess. Preoperative diagnostic accuracy is of utmost importance during pregnancy because a negative appendectomy is associated with a significant incidence of fetal loss. The increased morbidity associated with appendectomy delay suggests that prompt surgical intervention remains the safest approach. Routine incidental appendectomy should not be performed except in selected cases. Interval appendectomy is not indicated because of considerable risks of complications and lack of any clinical benefit. Patients older than 40 years with an appendiceal mass or abscess treated nonoperatively should routinely have a colonoscopy as part of their follow-up to rule out cancer or alternative diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pedro G R Teixeira
- Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, LAC and USC Medical Center, University of Southern California, 2051 Marengo Street, IPT, Room C5L 100, Los Angeles, CA 90033-4525, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Malik AA, Wani ML, Wani SN, Parray FQ, Nayeem-Ul-Hassan, Irshad I. Evaluating conservative treatment for acute appendicitis with lump formation. J Emerg Trauma Shock 2012; 5:33-5. [PMID: 22416152 PMCID: PMC3299151 DOI: 10.4103/0974-2700.93108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2010] [Accepted: 11/13/2011] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Interval appendectomy after acute appendicitis with lump formation (phlegmon) remains controversial. We conducted this study to determine the risk of recurrent appendicitis following initial non-operative treatment for appendicitis, and evaluate factors associated with recurrence. Secondarily, we evaluate the efficacy of interval appendectomy versus no appendectomy. Materials and Methods: Patients who received conservative treatment for appendicitis with lump formation were prospectively studied from June 2006 to June 2008. These patients were followed for recurrence of appendicitis. Results: Of 763 patients with acute appendicitis some 220 patients had lump formation (28.8%). Median age was 28 years. Conservative treatment was successful in 213 (96.8%) patients. The rate of recurrence was 13.1%, all occurring within six months after the index admission. Mean follow-up was 26±18 months. Conclusion: Conservative treatment of appendicitis with lump formation is efficient and the recurrence rate is low. Routine interval appendectomy after initial conservative treatment for lump formation is not a cost-effective intervention and not recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ajaz Ahmad Malik
- Department of General Surgery and Allied Specialities, Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Quartey B. Interval appendectomy in adults: A necessary evil? J Emerg Trauma Shock 2012; 5:213-6. [PMID: 22988397 PMCID: PMC3440885 DOI: 10.4103/0974-2700.99683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2011] [Accepted: 05/13/2011] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The management of appendiceal mass remains a matter of major controversy in the current literature. Currently, initial nonoperative management followed by interval appendectomy is favored over immediate appendicectomy. However, the necessity of doing an interval appendectomy has been questioned - is it a necessary evil? The present review revisits the above controversy, evaluates the current literature, assesses the need for interval appendectomy in adults, and provides recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin Quartey
- Department of Surgery, National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20889, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sakorafas GH, Sabanis D, Lappas C, Mastoraki A, Papanikolaou J, Siristatidis C, Smyrniotis V. Interval routine appendectomy following conservative treatment of acute appendicitis: Is it really needed. World J Gastrointest Surg 2012; 4:83-6. [PMID: 22590661 PMCID: PMC3351492 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v4.i4.83] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2011] [Revised: 03/24/2012] [Accepted: 03/30/2012] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Conservative management of acute appendicitis (AA) is gradually being adopted as a valuable therapeutic choice in the treatment of selected patients with AA. This approach is based on the results of many recent studies indicating that it is a valuable and effective alternative to routine emergency appendectomy. Existing data do not support routine interval appendectomy following successful conservative management of AA; indeed, the risk of recurrence is low. Moreover, recurrences usually exhibit a milder clinical course compared to the first episode of AA. The role of routine interval appendectomy is also questioned recently, even in patients with AA complicated by plastron or localized abscess formation. Surgical judgment is required to avoid misdiagnosis when selecting a conservative approach in patients with a presumed “appendiceal” mass.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- George H Sakorafas
- George H Sakorafas, Dimitrios Sabanis, Christos Lappas, Aikaterini Mastoraki, Vasileios Smyrniotis, 4th Department of Surgery, Athens University, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, GR-115 26 Athens, Greece
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nixon M, Verwey J, Akoh JA. Caecal tumour masquerading as an appendicular mass. Clin Pract 2012; 2:e4. [PMID: 24765403 PMCID: PMC3981336 DOI: 10.4081/cp.2012.e4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2011] [Revised: 11/29/2011] [Accepted: 12/05/2011] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Appropriate management of appendix mass is based on an accurate diagnosis of the underlying pathology. This is a report of a complex patient presenting with an appendix mass, whose surgery was deferred due to severe co-morbidities and who later died from severe metastatic disease. A 65-year-old lady presented with right iliac fossa pain and a mass. She was treated for an appendix mass initially and when the mass failed to resolve after four weeks, she was thoroughly investigated for the possibility of a tumour. Severe co-morbities had a significant impact on her management as definitive surgery was delayed. She represented 10 months after the initial admission with small bowel obstruction and died of metastatic caecal cancer. Management of appendix mass must entail a careful approach to investigating and treatment with emphasis on early intervention if the mass does not resolve promptly. This will avoid delayed diagnosis, treatment and a detrimental impact on prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martha Nixon
- Gastroenterology, Surgery & Renal Services Directorate, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK
| | - Jes Verwey
- Gastroenterology, Surgery & Renal Services Directorate, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK
| | - Jacob A Akoh
- Gastroenterology, Surgery & Renal Services Directorate, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Simillis C, Symeonides P, Shorthouse AJ, Tekkis PP. A meta-analysis comparing conservative treatment versus acute appendectomy for complicated appendicitis (abscess or phlegmon). Surgery 2010; 147:818-29. [PMID: 20149402 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 223] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2007] [Accepted: 11/20/2009] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND No standardized approach is available for the management of complicated appendicitis defined as appendiceal abscess and phlegmon. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare conservative treatment versus acute appendectomy. METHODS Comparative studies were identified by a literature search. The end points evaluated were overall complications, need for reoperation, duration of hospital stay, and duration of intravenous antibiotics. Heterogeneity was assessed and a sensitivity analysis was performed to account for bias in patient selection. RESULTS Seventeen studies (16 nonrandomized retrospective and 1 nonrandomized prospective) reported on 1,572 patients: 847 patients received conservative treatment and 725 had acute appendectomy. Conservative treatment was associated with significantly less overall complications, wound infections, abdominal/pelvic abscesses, ileus/bowel obstructions, and reoperations. No significant difference was found in the duration of first hospitalization, the overall duration of hospital stay, and the duration of intravenous antibiotics. Overall complications remained significantly less in the conservative treatment group during sensitivity analysis of studies including only pediatric patients, high-quality studies, more recent studies, and studies with a larger group of patients. CONCLUSION The conservative management of complicated appendicitis is associated with a decrease in complication and reoperation rate compared with acute appendectomy, and it has a similar duration of hospital stay. Because of significant heterogeneity between studies, additional studies should be undertaken to confirm these findings.
Collapse
|
12
|
Meshikhes AWN. Management of appendiceal mass: controversial issues revisited. J Gastrointest Surg 2008; 12:767-775. [PMID: 17999120 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-007-0399-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2007] [Accepted: 10/16/2007] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Although appendix mass occurs in 10% of patients with acute appendicitis, its surgical management is surrounded with controversy. This article reviews some of the controversial issues in the management of appendix mass. METHODS A search of the English literature was conducted for "appendiceal mass," "interval appendicectomy," and "laparoscopic appendicectomy" and manual cross-referencing. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION The majority of the studies were small and retrospective. Emergency appendicectomy for appendix mass is emerging as an alternative to conventional conservative treatment. It is feasible, safe, and cost-effective, allowing early diagnosis and treatment of unexpected pathology. However, the appropriate timing for emergency surgery is not clear. After successful conservative management, interval appendicectomy is not necessary and can safely be omitted, except in patients with recurrent symptoms. In patients over 40 years of age, other pathological causes of right iliac mass must be excluded by further investigations (colonoscopy and computerized tomography scan), and a close follow-up is needed. Laparoscopic appendicectomy whether in emergency or interval settings is feasible and safe and should replace the conventional open method. Large prospective, randomized controlled trials are lacking, and therefore, such trials are needed to scientifically compare emergency surgery vs conservative management without interval appendicectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdul-Wahed N Meshikhes
- Department of Surgical Specialties, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam 34111, Saudi Arabia.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Liu K, Ahanchi S, Pisaneschi M, Lin I, Walter R. Can Acute Appendicitis be Treated by Antibiotics Alone? Am Surg 2007. [DOI: 10.1177/000313480707301118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
Emergency appendectomy at presentation has been the standard of care for acute appendicitis. We examined the use of antibiotics as an alternative treatment. From September 2002 to August 2003, 170 consecutive patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis without abscess were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: Group I (n = 151) underwent emergency appendectomy and Group II (n = 19) received antibiotics alone. The mode of treatment was at the attending surgeon's discretion. The overall complication rate was eight per cent for Group I and 10 per cent for Group II patients ( P = 0.22). Group II patients suffered no complications during antibiotic treatment, and any complications that did occur developed after subsequent appendectomy. One Group II patient had recurrent appendicitis (5%). The length of stay was 2.61 ± 0.21 days for Group I and 2.95 ± 0.38 days for Group II patients ( P = 0.57). Patients with acute appendicitis may be treated safely with antibiotics alone without emergency appendectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine Liu
- Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois
- Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Sadie Ahanchi
- Chicago Medical School at Rosalind Franklin University, Chicago, Illinois; and, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Mark Pisaneschi
- Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Irene Lin
- Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Robert Walter
- Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois
- Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Roviaro GC, Vergani C, Varoli F, Francese M, Caminiti R, Maciocco M. Videolaparoscopic appendectomy: the current outlook. Surg Endosc 2007. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-007-9519-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
15
|
Deakin DE, Ahmed I. Interval appendicectomy after resolution of adult inflammatory appendix mass--is it necessary? Surgeon 2007; 5:45-50. [PMID: 17313128 DOI: 10.1016/s1479-666x(07)80111-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The management of adult inflammatory appendix mass is evolving. Traditional management has been shown to be initially conservative, with interval appendicectomy performed after the mass resolved. This remains the most common approach in UK surgical practice. Recently, an increasing number of studies have challenged this approach. This review looks at the management of the inflammatory appendix mass in the adult in light of these recent changes and suggests a management approach based on the current evidence. METHODS A Medline, Pubmed and Cochrane database search was performed using key words including combinations of; appendix, appendiceal, interval, appendectomy, appendicectomy, mass, abscess, phlegmon, and appendicitis. All articles were cross-referenced. FINDINGS A conservative management approach will be successful in the majority of patients presenting with an appendix mass. The incidence of recurrence of symptoms following successful conservative management is low. CONCLUSION After initial successful conservative management, routine use of interval appendicectomy is not justified in asymptomatic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D E Deakin
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham City Hospital, Nottingham, England, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Corfield L. Interval appendicectomy after appendiceal mass or abscess in adults: what is "best practice"? Surg Today 2007; 37:1-4. [PMID: 17186336 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-006-3334-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2006] [Accepted: 05/09/2006] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
There is still much controversy surrounding whether interval appendicectomy is appropriate for adults with an appendiceal mass or abscess. The main debate centres on the recurrence rate, the complication rate of interval appendicectomy, and the potential for underlying malignancy. This review aims to assess current practice and to determine whether it is possible to define "best practice" for the asymptomatic patient who has had an appendiceal mass or abscess treated conservatively. I sent a postal questionnaire to 90 consultant general surgeons requesting information about their practice of interval appendicectomy. I also conducted a literature search confined to studies involving only adult patients. The 77.8% of questionnaires returned revealed that 53% of the surgeons perform routine interval appendicectomy, mainly because of concerns about recurrence. The preference was for open appendicectomy at 6 weeks to 3 months. The literature search revealed a recurrence rate of 10%-25%, with a complication rate of 23%. It was evident that the chances of missing malignancy are low and thorough investigation is better than interval appendicectomy in detecting colonic cancer. The practice of performing interval appendicectomy varies, with just over half of the surgeons surveyed performing this procedure routinely. The literature provides little evidence that interval appendicectomy is routinely indicated and would support the view that it is unnecessary in 75%-90% of cases. However, there is scope for further consideration of the use of laparoscopic interval appendicectomy and a randomised trial is needed to fully evaluate this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorraine Corfield
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Lewisham, Lewisham High Street, London, SE13 6LH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Owen A, Moore O, Marven S, Roberts J. Interval laparoscopic appendectomy in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2006; 16:308-11. [PMID: 16796448 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2006.16.308] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Conservative management of advanced complicated appendicitis in children is becoming more common. Formation of an appendiceal mass or abscess may mitigate against urgent appendectomy during the acute stage, and conservative treatment followed by interval appendectomy has been advocated. We present our experience of interval laparoscopic appendectomy in our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS All children who were offered interval laparoscopic appendectomy between January 2000 and December 2004 were included. Retrospective case note analysis was performed and data collected included demographics, duration of symptoms, method of diagnosis, days of antibiotics, length of interval, operative time, length of hospital stay (conservative treatment and interval laparoscopic appendectomy), analgesia requirements, complications, and histology. RESULTS Thirty-six children, median age 8 years (range, 1-15 years) diagnosed with appendiceal mass or abscess were offered interval laparoscopic appendectomy by two surgeons in our institution: one patient declined interval laparoscopic appendectomy. Median antibiotic treatment was 10 days (range, 3-23 days). Median length of stay for conservative treatment was 6 days (range, 1-27 days). Five children required percutaneous drainage. For the 35 children who had interval laparoscopic appendectomy, the median interval was 93 days (range, 34-156 days) and median operative time was 55 minutes (range, 25-120 minutes). Median length of stay for interval laparoscopic appendectomy was 1 day (range, 1-3 days). There were no complications following interval laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSION Interval laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed in children, is associated with a short hospital stay and minimal morbidity, analgesia, and scarring following conservative management of appendiceal mass or abscess. Interval laparoscopic appendectomy eliminates the risk of recurrent appendicitis and serves to excise undiagnosed carcinoid tumors. In future it may be possible to perform interval laparoscopic appendectomy as a day-case procedure in selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anthony Owen
- Paediatric Surgical Unit, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Western Bank, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Tsai HM, Shan YS, Lin PW, Lin XZ, Chen CY. Clinical analysis of the predictive factors for recurrent appendicitis after initial nonoperative treatment of perforated appendicitis. Am J Surg 2006; 192:311-6. [PMID: 16920424 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.08.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2005] [Revised: 08/08/2005] [Accepted: 08/08/2005] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to study the clinical symptoms, laboratory data, and the characteristics of computed tomography (CT) imaging of nonoperated perforated appendicitis for predicting the recurrence of appendicitis. METHODS Thirty-five patients with nonoperated perforated appendicitis were retrospectively reviewed for this study. During a median follow-up period of 1155 days, 7 patients had to receive an appendectomy owing to recurrent appendicitis. Accordingly, the patients were divided into 2 groups: the recurrence and the nonrecurrence group. The clinical characteristics between these 2 groups were compared. RESULTS Both of the 2 patients who had a past history of appendicitis suffered recurrent appendicitis (the recurrence versus the nonrecurrence group, P<.05). The only CT imaging relating to the recurrence of appendicitis is the presence of calcified appendicolith (the recurrence versus the nonrecurrence group, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS It is most likely that appendicitis will recur if a calcified appendicolith on CT imaging or a past history of appendicitis is presented. Interval appendectomy may be reserved only for those patients who possess one of these risk factors of recurrent appendicitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hong-Ming Tsai
- Department of Radiology, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Styrud J, Eriksson S, Nilsson I, Ahlberg G, Haapaniemi S, Neovius G, Rex L, Badume I, Granström L. Appendectomy versus Antibiotic Treatment in Acute Appendicitis. A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. World J Surg 2006; 30:1033-7. [PMID: 16736333 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-005-0304-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 351] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Appendectomy has been the treatment for acute appendicitis for over 120 years. Antibiotic treatment has occasionally been used in small uncontrolled studies, instead of operation, but this alternative has never before been tried in a multicenter randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Male patients, 18-50 years of age, admitted to six different hospitals in Sweden between 1996 and 1999 were enrolled in the study. No women were enrolled by decision of the local ethics committee. If appendectomy was planned, patients were asked to participate, and those who agreed were randomized either to surgery or to antibiotic therapy. Patients randomized to surgery were operated on with open surgery or laparoscopically. Those randomized to antibiotic therapy were treated intravenously for 2 days, followed by oral treatment for 10 days. If symptoms did not resolve within 24 hours, an appendectomy was performed. Participants were monitored at the end of 1 week, 6 weeks, and 1 year. RESULTS During the study period 252 men participated, 124 in the surgery group and 128 in the antibiotic group. The frequency of appendicitis was 97% in the surgery group and 5% had a perforated appendix. The complication rate was 14% in the surgery group. In the antibiotic group 86% improved without surgery; 18 patients were operated on within 24 hours, and the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was confirmed in all but one patient, and he was suffering from terminal ileitis. There were seven patients (5%) with a perforated appendix in this group. The rate of recurrence of symptoms of appendicitis among the 111 patients treated with antibiotics was 14% during the 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Acute non-perforated appendicitis can be treated successfully with antibiotics. However, there is a risk of recurrence in cases of acute appendicitis, and this risk should be compared with the risk of complications after appendectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johan Styrud
- Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Danderyd Hospital, S-182 88, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Lai HW, Loong CC, Chiu JH, Chau GY, Wu CW, Lui WY. Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. World J Surg 2006; 30:352-7. [PMID: 16479354 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-005-0128-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to clarify the role of interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. METHODS From January 1998 to December 2003, patients with an appendiceal mass who received conservative treatment at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital were studied retrospectively. Data on demographics, rate of appendicitis recurrence, duration of hospital stay, and complication rate were collected and analyzed. RESULTS A total of 165 patients were included (89 males, 76 females). The mean age was 53.6 years (range 7-89 years). The rate of appendicitis recurrence after conservative treatment was 25.5%; most recurred within 6 months after discharge (83.3%). The benefit of preventing recurrence is less than 16% if interval appendectomy is performed 6 weeks after discharge and less than 10% if it is done 12 weeks later. The complication rate of appendectomy performed before or after recurrence was 10% in both groups. The duration of the second hospital stay for patients who underwent interval appendectomy before or after recurrence was 4.43 +/- 3.32 vs. 6.75 +/- 5.73 days (P = 0.023). Of the 165 patients, 17 (10.3%) had their diagnosis changed after survey or surgery, and 5 (3.03%) were found to have colon cancer upon follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Patients who recovered from conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass should undergo colonoscopy or barium enema to detect any underlying diseases and to rule out coexistent colorectal cancer. Routine interval appendectomy benefits less than 20% of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hung-Wen Lai
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 201, Section 2, Shih-Pai Road, Taipei 112, Taiwan, ROC
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
A retrospective chart review of 32 patients who underwent laparoscopic interval appendectomy at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario between May 1999 and December 2003 was performed. The age range was 0.5 to 18 years (mean, 11.8 years; median, 11.5 years). The interval time from the acute episode to the laparoscopic interval appendectomy ranged from 1 to 16 weeks (median, 6 weeks). The initial presentations were 11 patients with appendiceal abscess, 9 with appendiceal masses/phlegmons, and 12 patients with an acute but resolving clinical picture with ultrasonographic evidence of appendicitis. There were no wound infections or recurrent intra-abdominal abscesses. The average length of stay was 1.38 days, ranging from same-day discharge (1 patient) to a three-night stay (2 patients). There were no complications related to the laparoscopic technique, confirming reports that laparoscopic interval appendectomy is a technically safe procedure. Pathologic analysis of the appendices demonstrated acute or subacute changes in 14 patients (interval time = 7.9 weeks), chronic changes in 8 (interval time = 8.1 weeks), both acute and chronic changes in 5 (interval time = 8.2 weeks), and no pathologic diagnosis in 6 (interval time = 4.28 weeks). These findings support the need for interval appendectomy, and suggest that laparoscopy is a safe alternative to open appendectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Bass
- Department of Surgery, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L1, Canada.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Lai HW, Loong CC, Wu CW, Lui WY. Watchful waiting versus interval appendectomy for patients who recovered from acute appendicitis with tumor formation: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Chin Med Assoc 2005; 68:431-4. [PMID: 16187600 DOI: 10.1016/s1726-4901(09)70159-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of appendicitis with tumor formation remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of interval appendectomy based on a cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS This was a retrospective study including appendicitis patients with tumor formation who received conservative treatment at first admission to Taipei Veterans General Hospital between January 1998 and December 2003. Demographic data, rate of recurrent appendicitis, and medical costs were analyzed. RESULTS Of the 165 patients, 1 died after an acute myocardial infarction. The rate of recurrence of appendicitis after conservative treatment was 25.5%. The median cost of follow-up after conservative treatment was NT24,344 dollars. The median cost of interval appendectomy was NT47,746 dollars. The median cost of appendectomy after recurrent appendicitis was NT62,135 dollars. Routine interval appendectomy in all 164 patients would have cost NT7,830,344 dollars. The follow-up protocol with appendectomy after recurrence cost NT5,655,220 dollars. An additional NT2,175,124 dollars (38%) would have been needed for routine interval appendectomy compared with the follow-up policy, an extra NT13,263 dollars per person. CONCLUSION Routine interval appendectomy would increase the cost per patient by 38% compared with follow-up and appendectomy after recurrence. Routine interval appendectomy is not a cost-effective intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hung-Wen Lai
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Mazuski JE. Clinical Challenges and Unmet Needs in the Management of Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2005. [DOI: 10.1089/sur.2005.6.s-49] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
|
24
|
Dixon MR, Haukoos JS, Park IU, Oliak D, Kumar RR, Arnell TD, Stamos MJ. An assessment of the severity of recurrent appendicitis. Am J Surg 2004; 186:718-22; discussion 722. [PMID: 14672785 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.08.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study examines the clinical characteristics of patients who developed recurrent appendicitis after previous nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis. METHODS Retrospective chart review was performed, and data from the recurrent and initial episode of appendicitis were collected. RESULTS In all, 237 patients from 1989 to 2001 were managed nonoperatively for perforated appendicitis and 32 (14%) were readmitted for recurrent appendicitis. Median white blood cell count at recurrence was 9.5 (interquartile range [IQR]: 6.6 to 13.2] versus 13.1 [IQR: 10.8 to 16.1] at initial presentation (P = 0.002). Maximum temperature was 98.6 degrees F [IQR: 98.2 to 100.5] at recurrence versus 100.3 degrees F [IQR: 99.5 to 101.5] (P = 0.008). Median time for intravenous antibiotics use was 3 [IQR: 3 to 7] days at recurrence versus 6 [IQR: 4 to 8] days initially (P = 0.01). Inpatient stay was also shorter; median length was 6 [IQR: 3 to 8] days compared with 7 [IQR: 5 to 9] days at initial presentation (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Patients managed nonoperatively for perforated appendicitis who later developed recurrent appendicitis exhibited a milder clinical course at recurrence. Elective interval appendectomy may be reserved until a recurrent episode.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew R Dixon
- Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Okafor PIS, Orakwe JC, Chianakwana GU. Management of appendiceal masses in a peripheral hospital in Nigeria: review of thirty cases. World J Surg 2003; 27:800-3. [PMID: 14509509 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-003-6891-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
The objective of this work was to conduct a truly rural-based study to evaluate, from our own rural data devoid of influence from urban-based studies, the management of appendiceal masses in a typical peripheral hospital in Nigeria. The study aimed to highlight the results of neglected appendicitis in our community and the occasional difficulty of making a correct preoperative diagnosis. It also sought to draw the attention of the health care practitioner in our community to the importance of continued enlightenment of the people regarding the need to seek medical treatment early. This was a retrospective study, with the setting at St. Victoria Specialist Hospital, Ekwulobia, Anambra State, Nigeria, a rural hospital serving its community. A series of 30 patients who were managed for an appendiceal mass between January 1, 1992 and December 31, 2001, a 10-year period, were included in the study. We identified the cases by reviewing the surgical register. The relevant case notes were retrieved from the Records Department. The following data were extracted for each patient: age and sex; how early the patient presented; the history and presentation of the patient; whether the diagnosis was made before or during surgery; the treatment modality; length of hospital stay; and outcome. The results showed that 13 patients (43.3%) presented more than 1 week after the onset of symptoms. The age range was 15 to 60 years (average 27 years); 13 patients (43.3%) were in the age range of 40-49 years. Twenty men and ten women were treated, giving a male/female ratio of 2:1. The main clinical features were fever, anorexia, pain, tenderness, and a palpable mass in the right iliac fossa. The problem was diagnosed before surgery in 23 patients (76.7%) and during surgery in 7 (23.3%). Treatment modalities were conservative + interval appendectomy in 18 patients (60%); open and close + conservative + interval appendectomy in 3 patients (10%); immediate appendectomy without burying the stump in 2 cases (6.7%); right hemicolectomy (in one 40-year-old woman and one 55-year-old man); and incision and drainage of an appendiceal abscess in 5 patients (16.7%). No deaths were recorded. The study showed that appendical masses are most prevalent during the fifth decade of life and are rare before age 10 and after age 60. More men are affected than women, and most cases can be diagnosed before surgery, although some patients must await more sophisticated diagnostic tools or surgical exploration for diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pius I S Okafor
- St. Victoria Specialist Hospital, Ekwulobia, Anambra State, Nigeria.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Willemsen PJ, Hoorntje LE, Eddes EHH, Ploeg RJ. The need for interval appendectomy after resolution of an appendiceal mass questioned. Dig Surg 2002; 19:216-20; discussion 221. [PMID: 12119525 DOI: 10.1159/000064216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Our current treatment of an appendiceal mass is initially conservative, followed by an interval appendectomy. The necessity of this routine interval appendectomy is debatable. A study was conducted to evaluate whether surgical factors and pathological features of the excised appendices support interval appendectomy. METHODS We performed a retrospective study at the University Hospital Groningen and the Deventer Ziekenhuis. All patients diagnosed with an appendiceal mass in the period January 1991 to January 1997 were identified using the hospital database. The medical records of all these patients (n = 233, 108 M, 125 F) were reviewed. The clinical course of the appendiceal mass patients was split up into three distinct episodes: initial diagnosis and treatment of the appendiceal mass, the interval period and the interval appendectomy. Presenting symptoms, findings at clinical examination and additional imaging (ultrasound) were registered, as well as the course of the primary hospitalisation, the interval period, and the interval appendectomy. Results of histological examination of all resected specimens were reviewed. RESULTS It was found that clinical findings alone were not specific enough to diagnose an appendiceal mass; 47% had a palpable abdominal mass and the median temperature was 38.2 degrees C ranging from 36 to 40.5 degrees C. Ultrasound examination was done in 69% of patients and showed an appendiceal mass in 72%. During the interval period, 4 patients presented with an appendiceal mass needing drainage, and 3 with acute appendicitis requiring emergency appendectomy. At interval appendectomy, histological examination of resection specimen showed a normal appendix without signs of previous inflammation in 30% of cases. In addition, complications due to interval appendectomy were seen in 18% of patients, including sepsis, bowel perforation, small bowel ileus, and various wound abscesses. CONCLUSIONS We conclude that when causes for the appendiceal mass other than appendicitis are excluded, interval appendectomy seems unnecessary in patients who respond well to initial conservative treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul J Willemsen
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Tingstedt B, Bexe-Lindskog E, Ekelund M, Andersson R. Management of appendiceal masses. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY = ACTA CHIRURGICA 2002; 168:579-582. [PMID: 12699091 DOI: 10.1080/11024150201680001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the outcome of patients treated for appendiceal abscess, and managed either conservatively or surgically, and to describe the short and long-term outcome as well as incidence of interval appendicectomy in those treated conservatively. DESIGN Retrospective study. SETTING University hospital, Sweden. PATIENTS Ninety-three patients with the diagnosis of appendiceal abscess, 50 treated conservatively and 43 who were operated on, with a mean age of 46 (14-93) years. Mean (range) follow-up for patients operated on was 65 (11-135) and for those treated conservatively 66 (6-136) months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Course of acute disease, recorded complications, recurrence of appendicitis and incidence of interval appendicectomy during follow-up. RESULTS The duration of pain before admission was 4 (0.5-82) days for those operated on and 7 (2-60) days for those treated conservatively. A palpable mass was more common in the conservatively managed group. Complications were common among patients who were operated on. No interval appendicectomies were done during the second half of the study period. 4 of the patients treated conservatively (8%) had an underlying tumour diagnosed at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Operative management of patients with appendiceal masses seems to be associated with a high risk of postoperative complications and the risk of a more extensive surgical procedure. If possible, a conservative approach should be advocated. Because of inaccurate radiological imaging during the acute phase and the risk of an underlying malignancy, routine follow-up is necessary. Routine interval appendicectomy cannot be recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bobby Tingstedt
- Department of Surgery, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Saadia R. Re: Is there a role for interval appendectomy in the management of acute appendicitis? Am Surg 2001. [DOI: 10.1177/000313480106700824] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Roger Saadia
- Health Sciences Centre Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Friedell ML, Perez-Izquierdo M. Is There a Role for Interval Appendectomy in the Management of Acute Appendicitis? Am Surg 2000. [DOI: 10.1177/000313480006601213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Interval appendectomy (IA) remains a controversial subject in surgery. To determine its effectiveness we reviewed our results with this approach. From January 1990 through December 1998 a total of 73 patients underwent appendectomy, five (7%) of which were interval in nature. These IA patients had a palpable abdominal mass or delayed presentation that led to CT scan. The decision to delay surgery was determined by two factors: 1) a CT scan that showed advanced inflammatory changes (phlegmon or abscess) associated with acute appendicitis and 2) a rapid response to conservative management. All patients received antibiotics—first intravenous and then oral. Repeat CT scans were performed before surgery and showed a virtual resolution of the inflammatory process. Appendectomy was delayed from 35 to 66 days from the time of diagnosis (average 51 days). There were no preoperative complications, the operations were uneventful, and there were no significant postoperative sequelae. IA appears to convert an unfavorable surgical situation potentially fraught with complications (fistula, abscess, wound infection) to one that is essentially elective in nature. It should be considered for the patient who is found to have an extensive periappendiceal inflammatory process, is clinically stable, and responds favorably to initial nonoperative management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark L. Friedell
- Department of Surgical Education, Orlando Regional Healthcare System, Orlando, Florida
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Lidar Z, Kuriansky J, Rosin D, Shabtai M, Ayalon A. Laparoscopic interval appendectomy for periappendicular abscess. Surg Endosc 2000; 14:764-6. [PMID: 10954826 DOI: 10.1007/s004640000188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic appendectomy was first described in the early 1980s and is currently widely used for the treatment of acute appendicitis. The application of laparoscopic techniques to interval appendectomy and the value of this procedure as compared to open elective interval appendectomy remains uncertain. Therefore, we set out to assess the usefulness of interval laparoscopic appendectomy following periappendicular abscess. METHODS This study analyzes the data for 10 patients who underwent interval laparoscopic appendectomy 8-10 weeks following documented periappendicular abscess in the period between January 1996 and June 1998. RESULTS Laparoscopic appendectomy was completed successfully in all 10 patients. Nine patients were discharged 1 day after the operation; one patient was discharged on the evening of the operative day. There were no complications and no wound infections. CONCLUSION We conclude that the laparoscopic approach is the preferable treatment for interval appendectomy. It is associated with minimal or no morbidity and a very short hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Z Lidar
- Department of General Surgery and Transplantation, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|