Dataset Information

Management of appendiceal mass and abscess in children; early appendectomy or initial non-operative treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Appendiceal mass and abscess and its treatment are associated with significant morbidity and high costs. Still, the optimal treatment strategy is the point of debate. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare overall complications between initial non-operative treatment (NOT) and early appendectomy (EA) in children with appendiceal mass and/or abscess. METHODS:Pubmed and Embase were searched. Only randomized controlled trials and prospective or historical cohort studies that compared NOT with EA in children with appendiceal mass or abscess in terms of complications were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed. Primary outcome was the overall complication rate. Secondary, length of stay and readmission rate were investigated. A meta-analysis of overall complications associated with both treatment strategies was performed. RESULTS:14 of 7083 screened studies were selected, including 1022 children in the NOT group and 333 in the EA group. Duration of follow-up ranged between four weeks and 12 years. Risk of bias was moderate in four and serious in 10 studies. NOT was associated with a lower overall complication rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.65]). However, NOT led to increased length of stay (mean difference varied between 0.2 and 8.4 days) and higher readmission rate (RR 1.75 [95%CI 0.79-3.89]), although not significantly. Interval appendectomy after NOT was performed as a routine procedure in all but one study. This study found a recurrence rate of 34% in a group of 38 patients during a follow-up period of 3.4?±?1.7 years. CONCLUSION:NOT may reduce the overall complication rate compared to EA, but the evidence is very uncertain. As evidence is scarce, and of low level, and heterogeneity between studies is substantial, the results should be interpreted with caution. Large prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy for children with appendiceal mass and/or abscess.

SUBMITTER: van Amstel P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7644542 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Management of appendiceal mass and abscess in children; early appendectomy or initial non-operative treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

van Amstel Paul P Sluckin Tania C TC van Amstel Tim T van der Lee Johanna H JH de Vries Ralph R Derikx Joep P M JPM Bakx Roel R van Heurn L W Ernest LWE Gorter Ramon R RR

Surgical endoscopy 20200724 12

<h4>Background</h4>Appendiceal mass and abscess and its treatment are associated with significant morbidity and high costs. Still, the optimal treatment strategy is the point of debate. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare overall complications between initial non-operative treatment (NOT) and early appendectomy (EA) in children with appendiceal mass and/or abscess.<h4>Methods</h4>Pubmed and Embase were searched. Only randomized controlled trials and prospective o ...[more]

PMID: 32710216

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe 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 methods74 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.ResultsComparison 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.ConclusionConservative 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.

Project description:Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in children and is associated with extreme postoperative discomfort due to peritoneal inflammation and infection. The main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of postoperative pain (POP) in children after laparoscopic appendectomy. Articles describing or evaluating the control of POP in children with LA were considered eligible. All available literature such as randomized controls, prospective controls, retrospective as well as clinical studies were considered. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinical trials.gov, and Google scholar. The initial search took place on 23 April 2021, and was updated on 24 August 2021. There were no language or date restrictions. Each of the included articles was evaluated separately by two independent reviewers. Additional papers were found by searching the reference lists of eligible studies. Eighteen papers were considered. All papers, and many of them used different methods to treat POP in children undergoing LA, such as lidocaine infusion, different analgesic approaches, ultrasound-guided transverse abdominis blockade (UGTAP), ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum blockade (UGQLB), and comparison of open appendectomy (OA) with local anesthetics in relation to POP management in children. Laparoscopic appendectomy is the surgical procedure preferred by clinicians compared with open appendectomy in children. A multimodal analgesic approach is optimal and efficient surgical techniques such as UGBRSB, UGQLB, and UGTAP block might significantly impact POP in children except that there are contraindications. Dexmedetomidine proved to be an effective adjuvant that can enhance the effect of local anesthetics. The lack of a sufficient number of studies may be a factor affecting our confidence in the results of this study. Therefore, further evidence-based randomized control trials with a large sample size are needed to provide clarity.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Based on epidemiological, immunological and pathology data, the idea that appendicitis is not necessarily a progressive disease is gaining ground. Two types are distinguished: simple and complicated appendicitis. Non-operative treatment (NOT) of children with simple appendicitis has been investigated in several small studies. So far, it is deemed safe. However, its effectiveness and effect on quality of life (QoL) have yet to be established in an adequately powered randomised trial. In this article, we provide the study protocol for the APAC (Antibiotics versus Primary Appendectomy in Children) trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial randomises children aged 7-17 years with imaging-confirmed simple appendicitis between appendectomy and NOT. Patients are recruited in 15 hospitals. The intended sample size, based on the primary outcome, rate of complications and a non-inferiority margin of 5%, is 334 patients.NOT consists of intravenous antibiotics for 48-72 hours, daily blood tests and ultrasound follow-up. If the patient meets the predefined discharge criteria, antibiotic treatment is continued orally at home. Primary outcome is the rate of complications at 1-year follow-up. An independent adjudication committee will assess all complications and their relation to the allocated treatment. Secondary outcomes include, but are not limited to, delayed appendectomies, QoL, pain and (in)direct costs.The primary outcome will be analysed both according to the intention-to-treat principle and the per-protocol principle, and is presented with a one-sided 97.5% CI. We will use multiple logistic and linear regression for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively, to adjust for stratification factors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam. Data monitoring is performed by an independent institute and a Data Safety Monitoring Board has been assigned. Results will be presented in peer-reviewed academic journals and at (international) conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02848820; NTR5977; Pre-results.

Project description:ImportanceThe step after conservative treatment of periappendicular abscess arouses controversy, ranging from recommendations to abandon interval appendectomy based on low recurrence rates of the precipitating diagnosis to performing routine interval appendectomy owing to novel findings of increased neoplasm risk at interval appendectomy. To our knowledge, there are no randomized clinical trials with sufficient patient numbers comparing these treatments.ObjectiveTo compare interval appendectomy and follow-up with magnetic resonance imaging after initial successful nonoperative treatment of periappendicular abscess.Design, setting, and participantsThe Peri-Appendicitis Acuta randomized clinical trial was a multicenter, noninferiority trial conducted in 5 hospitals in Finland. All patients between age 18 and 60 years with periappendicular abscess diagnosed by computed tomography and successful initial nonoperative treatment from January 2013 to April 2016 were included. Data analysis occurred from April 2016 to September 2017.InterventionsPatients were randomized either to interval appendectomy or follow-up with magnetic resonance imaging; all patients underwent colonoscopy.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was treatment success, defined as an absence of postoperative morbidity in the appendectomy group and appendicitis recurrence in the follow-up group. Secondary predefined end points included neoplasm incidence, inflammatory bowel disease, length of hospital stay, and days of sick leave.ResultsA total of 60 patients were included (36 men [60%]; median [interquartile range] age: interval appendectomy group, 49 [18-60] years; follow-up group, 47 [22-61] years). An interim analysis in April 2016 showed a high rate of neoplasm (10 of 60 [17%]), with all neoplasms in patients older than 40 years. The trial was prematurely terminated owing to ethical concerns. Two more neoplasms were diagnosed after study termination, resulting in an overall neoplasm incidence of 20% (12 of 60). On study termination, the overall morbidity rate of interval appendectomy was 10% (3 of 30), and 10 of the patients in the follow-up group (33%) had undergone appendectomy.Conclusions and relevanceThe neoplasm rate after periappendicular abscess in this small study population was high, especially in patients older than 40 years. If this considerable rate of neoplasms after periappendicular abscess is validated by future studies, it would argue for routine interval appendectomy in this setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013686.

Project description:Fracture to fifth metatarsal's base is one the most common injury experienced at the foot. Studies have for long debated the use of operative and non-operative interventions for the management of the fracture, especially owing to its peculiar vasculature. However, to date, no attempt has been made to synthesize the evidence comparing the efficacy of operative and non-operative interventions for managing the fifth metatarsal's base fracture. To meta-statistically compare the effects of operative and non-operative management of fifth metatarsal base fracture. A systematic identification of literature was performed according to PRISMA guidelines on four academic databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. A meta-analysis evaluated the influence of operative and non-operative interventions on rate of non-union, mean duration of union, duration of return to activity, duration of return to sport, visual analog scale, and the American orthopedic foot & ankle scale. Out of 1,170 records, 11 articles including 404 participants (mean age: 29.8 ± 7.4 years) were included in this review. This systematic review presents a 1b level of evidence supporting the use of operative interventions for enhancing fracture union as compared to non-operative interventions. The meta-analysis reveals beneficial effects for operative interventions by demonstrating medium to large effect reduction of rate of non-union (Hedge's g: -0.66), duration of union (-1.7), duration of return to activity (-2.07), visual analog scale (-0.86), and enhancement of the American orthopedic foot & ankle scale score (0.73) as compared to non-operative intervention. The current systematic review and meta-analysis recommend the use of operative interventions for managing the fifth metatarsal's base fracture. The review reports beneficial effects of operative interventions as compared to non-operative interventions for reducing the rate of non-union, duration of union, duration of return to activity, duration of return to sport, visual analog scale, and increasing the American orthopedic foot & ankle scale score.

Dataset Information

Management of appendiceal mass and abscess in children; early appendectomy or initial non-operative treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Management of appendiceal mass and abscess in children; early appendectomy or initial non-operative treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets