Dataset Information

Antibiotics-First Versus Surgery for Appendicitis: A US Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Allowing Outpatient Antibiotic Management.

ABSTRACT: Randomized trials suggest that nonoperative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics-first is safe. No trial has evaluated outpatient treatment and no US randomized trial has been conducted, to our knowledge. This pilot study assessed feasibility of a multicenter US study comparing antibiotics-first, including outpatient management, with appendectomy.Patients aged 5 years or older with uncomplicated appendicitis at 1 US hospital were randomized to appendectomy or intravenous ertapenem greater than or equal to 48 hours and oral cefdinir and metronidazole. Stable antibiotics-first-treated participants older than 13 years could be discharged after greater than or equal to 6-hour emergency department (ED) observation with next-day follow-up. Outcomes included 1-month major complication rate (primary) and hospital duration, pain, disability, quality of life, and hospital charges, and antibiotics-first appendectomy rate.Of 48 eligible patients, 30 (62.5%) consented, of whom 16 (53.3%) were randomized to antibiotics-first and 14 (46.7%) to appendectomy. Median age was 33 years (range 9 to 73 years), median WBC count was 15,000/?L (range 6,200 to 23,100/?L), and median computed tomography appendiceal diameter was 10 mm (range 7 to 18 mm). Of 15 antibiotic-treated adults, 14 (93.3%) were discharged from the ED and all had symptom resolution. At 1 month, major complications occurred in 2 appendectomy participants (14.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8% to 42.8%) and 1 antibiotics-first participant (6.3%; 95% CI 0.2% to 30.2%). Antibiotics-first participants had less total hospital time than appendectomy participants, 16.2 versus 42.1 hours, respectively. Antibiotics-first-treated participants had less pain and disability. During median 12-month follow-up, 2 of 15 antibiotics-first-treated participants (13.3%; 95% CI 3.7% to 37.9%) developed appendicitis and 1 was treated successfully with antibiotics; 1 had appendectomy. No more major complications occurred in either group.A multicenter US trial comparing antibiotics-first to appendectomy, including outpatient management, is feasible to evaluate efficacy and safety.

SUBMITTER: Talan DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5616169 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Antibiotics-First Versus Surgery for Appendicitis: A US Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Allowing Outpatient Antibiotic Management.

Talan David A DA Saltzman Darin J DJ Mower William R WR Krishnadasan Anusha A Jude Cecilia M CM Amii Ricky R DeUgarte Daniel A DA Wu James X JX Pathmarajah Kavitha K Morim Ashkan A Moran Gregory J GJ

Annals of emergency medicine 20161211 1

<h4>Study objective</h4>Randomized trials suggest that nonoperative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics-first is safe. No trial has evaluated outpatient treatment and no US randomized trial has been conducted, to our knowledge. This pilot study assessed feasibility of a multicenter US study comparing antibiotics-first, including outpatient management, with appendectomy.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients aged 5 years or older with uncomplicated appendicitis at 1 US hospital were random ...[more]

PMID: 27974169

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Studies have compared surgical with nonsurgical therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis, but none of these studies have a patient-centered perspective. Objectives:To evaluate how patients might choose between surgical and nonsurgical therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis and to identify targets to make antibiotic treatment more appealing. Design, Setting, and Participants:This study comprised an online survey and an in-person sensitivity analysis survey. For the web survey, a convenience sample of 1728 respondents were asked to imagine that they or their child had acute uncomplicated appendicitis, provided information about laparoscopic and open appendectomy and antibiotic treatment alone, and asked which treatment they might choose. The web survey was open from April 17, 2016, through June 16, 2016, and was disseminated via email link, a poster with a Quick Response code, and social media. For the sensitivity analysis, 220 respondents were given the same scenario and options. Those who chose surgery were asked whether certain factors influenced their decision; each factor was incrementally improved during questioning about whether respondents would consider switching to antibiotics. These participants were recruited at public venues from June 3, 2016, to July 31, 2016. Web survey data were analyzed from June 17, 2016, to September 21, 2017. Sensitivity analysis data were analyzed from August 1, 2016, to September 21, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures:Treatment preferences. Results:Among the 1728 web survey respondents, 1225 (70.9%) were female and 500 (28.9%) were male (3 [0.2%] either did not answer or responded as "gender fluid" within the comments section of the survey), and most self-reported being between 50 and 59 years of age (391 [22.6%]) and being non-Hispanic white (1563 [90.5%]). For themselves, 1482 respondents (85.8%) chose laparoscopic appendectomy, 84 (4.9%) chose open appendectomy, and 162 (9.4%) chose antibiotics alone. For their child, 1372 respondents (79.4%) chose laparoscopic appendectomy, 106 (6.1%) open appendectomy, and 250 (14.5%) antibiotics alone. Respondents were somewhat more likely to choose antibiotics for themselves if they had education beyond college (105 [12.6%]; P?<?.001), identified as other than non-Hispanic white (24 [14.9%]; P?<?.001), or did not know anyone who had previously been hospitalized (12 [15.8%]; P?=?.02), but they were less likely to choose antibiotics if they were surgeons (11 [5.4%]; P?=?.008). Of the 220 participants interviewed for the sensitivity analysis, 120 (54.5%) were female and 100 (45.5%) were male, and most self-reported being between 18 and 24 years of age (53 [24.1%]) and being non-Hispanic white (204 [92.7%]). Their responses suggested that improvements in the short- and long-term failure rate of antibiotic treatment-rather than reductions in the duration of hospitalization or antibiotic treatment-were more likely to increase the desirability of choosing antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance:Most patients may choose surgical intervention over antibiotics alone in treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis, but a meaningful number may choose nonoperative management. Therefore, from a patient-centered perspective, this option should be discussed with patients, and future research could be directed at reducing the failure and recurrence rates of antibiotic treatment for appendicitis.

Project description:BackgroundTraditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis.MethodsWe performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18-60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.MethodsWe performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18-60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer's perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.ResultsLA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was $24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient.ConclusionsLA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer's perspective in the Colombian health system.

Project description:ImportanceIn the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized to receive antibiotics had outpatient management with hospital discharge within 24 hours. If outpatient management is safe, it could increase convenience and decrease health care use and costs.ObjectiveTo assess the use and safety of outpatient management of acute appendicitis.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study, which is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, included 776 adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis who received antibiotics at 25 US hospitals from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020.ExposuresParticipants randomized to antibiotics (intravenous then oral) could be discharged from the emergency department based on clinician judgment and prespecified criteria (hemodynamically stable, afebrile, oral intake tolerated, pain controlled, and follow-up confirmed). Outpatient management and hospitalization were defined as discharge within or after 24 hours, respectively.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes compared among patients receiving outpatient vs inpatient care included serious adverse events (SAEs), appendectomies, health care encounters, satisfaction, missed workdays at 7 days, and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) score at 30 days. In addition, appendectomy incidence among outpatients and inpatients, unadjusted and adjusted for illness severity, was compared.ResultsAmong 776 antibiotic-randomized participants, 42 (5.4%) underwent appendectomy within 24 hours and 8 (1.0%) did not receive their first antibiotic dose within 24 hours, leaving 726 (93.6%) comprising the study population (median age, 36 years; range, 18-86 years; 462 [63.6%] male; 437 [60.2%] White). Of these participants, 335 (46.1%; site range, 0-89.2%) were discharged within 24 hours, and 391 (53.9%) were discharged after 24 hours. Over 7 days, SAEs occurred in 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-2.6) per 100 outpatients and 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.9) per 100 inpatients; in the appendicolith subgroup, SAEs occurred in 2.3 (95% CI, 0.3-8.2) per 100 outpatients vs 2.8 (95% CI, 0.6-7.9) per 100 inpatients. During this period, appendectomy occurred in 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9%-13.7%) of outpatients and 14.1% (95% CI, 10.8%-18.0%) of inpatients; adjusted analysis demonstrated a similar difference in incidence (-4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to 0.6). At 30 days, appendectomies occurred in 12.6% (95% CI, 9.1%-16.7%) of outpatients and 19.0% (95% CI, 15.1%-23.4%) of inpatients. Outpatients missed fewer workdays (2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.3-2.9 days) than did inpatients (3.8 days; 95% CI, 3.4-4.3 days) and had similar frequency of return health care visits and high satisfaction and EQ-5D scores.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings support that outpatient antibiotic management is safe for selected adults with acute appendicitis, with no greater risk of complications or appendectomy than hospital care, and should be included in shared decision-making discussions of patient preferences for outcomes associated with nonoperative and operative care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Dataset Information

Antibiotics-First Versus Surgery for Appendicitis: A US Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Allowing Outpatient Antibiotic Management.

Publications

Antibiotics-First Versus Surgery for Appendicitis: A US Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Allowing Outpatient Antibiotic Management.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets