Perforation rate after a diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis on CT.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lastunen K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7893470 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Perforation rate after a diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis on CT.
Lastunen K K Leppäniemi A A Mentula P P
BJS open 20210101 1
<h4>Background</h4>Appendicectomy is a common emergency operation. The aim of this analysis was to study the effect of preoperative delay on disease progression, and whether a novel scoring system (Atema score) could be useful in predicting complicated appendicitis.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis on CT and who underwent appendicectomy in 2014-2015 were analysed for patient characteristics, preoperative delay and outcomes.<h4>Results</h4>Of 837 patients with uncompl ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) is a new and minimally invasive technique for the treatment of acute appendicitis. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and clinical outcomes of ERAT versus laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.MethodsWe adopted propensity score matching (1:1) to compare ERAT and laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis between April 2017 and March 2020. We reviewed 2880 patients with suspected acute appendicitis, of whom 422 patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis met the matching criteria (ERAT 79; laparoscopic appendectomy 343), yielding 78 pairs of patients.ResultsThe rate of curative treatment within 1 year after ERAT was 92.1 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 83.8 % to 96.3 %). The percentage of patients recording visual analog scale values of ≤ 3 for pain at 6 hours after treatment was 94.7 % (95 %CI 87.2 % to 97.9 %) in the ERAT group, which was significantly higher than that in the laparoscopic appendectomy group (83.3 %; 95 %CI 73.5 % to 90.0 %). Median procedure time and median hospital length of stay were significantly lower in the ERAT group compared with the laparoscopic appendectomy group. At 1 year, the median recurrence time was 50 days (interquartile range 25-127) in the ERAT group. The overall adverse event rate was 24.4 % (95 %CI 14.8 % to 33.9 %) in the laparoscopic appendectomy group and 18.4 % (95 %CI 9.7 % to 27.1 %) in the ERAT group, with no significant difference between the two groups.ConclusionERAT was a technically feasible method of treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis compared with laparoscopic appendectomy.
| S-EPMC9329065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:This study aims to differentiate acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis, by investigating the correlation between sonographic findings and histological results in different types of paediatric appendicitis. METHODS:This is a retrospective study of 1017 paediatric patients (age < 18 years) who underwent ultrasound by paediatric radiologists before appendicectomy at our institution between 2006 and 2016. Histologically, uncomplicated appendicitis was primarily associated with transmural infiltration of neutrophil granulocytes, while complicated appendicitis was characterised by transmural myonecrosis. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the association between sonographic and histological findings. RESULTS:Out of 566 (56%) male and 451 (44%) female patients with a mean age of 10.7 years, uncomplicated appendicitis was histologically diagnosed in 446 (44%) children and complicated appendicitis was diagnosed in 348 (34%) cases. The following ultrasound findings were significantly associated with complicated appendicitis in multivariate regression: an increased appendiceal diameter (OR = 1.3, p < .001), periappendiceal fat inflammation (OR = 1.5, p = 0.02), the presence of an appendicolith (OR = 1.7, p = 0.01) and a suspected perforation (OR = 6.0, p < .001) by the pediatric radiologist. For complicated appendicitis, an appendiceal diameter of more than 6?mm had the highest sensitivity (98%), while a sonographically suspected perforation showed the highest specificity (94%). CONCLUSION:Abdominal sonography by paediatric radiologists can differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in paediatric patients by using an increased appendiceal diameter, periappendiceal fat inflammation, the presence of an appendicolith and a suspected perforation as discriminatory markers. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:This paper demonstrates expanded information on ultrasound, which is not only an essential tool for diagnosing appendicitis, but also a key method for distinguishing between different forms of appendicitis when performed by paediatric radiologists. Compared with previous studies, the crucial distinction features in our analysis are 1) the definition of gangrene and not primarily perforation as an acute complicated appendicitis enabling early decision-making by sonography and 2) a large number of patients in a particularly affected age group.
| S-EPMC6636276 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Non-operative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis is safe and increasing in popularity, but has other risks and benefits compared with appendicectomy. This study aimed to explore the preference of the general population regarding operative or antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis. In this prospective study, a clinical scenario and questionnaire were submitted to a panel comprising a sample of an average adult population. The survey was distributed by an independent, external research bureau, and included a comprehensive explanation of the risks and benefits of both treatment options. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who would prefer antibiotics over surgery. Secondary outcomes were reasons for this preference and the accepted recurrence rate within 1 year when treated with antibiotics only. All outcomes were weighted for the average Dutch population. Of 254 participants, 49.2 per cent preferred antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 44.5 per cent preferred surgery, and 6.3 per cent could not make a decision. About half of the participants preferring antibiotics would accept a recurrence risk of more than 50 per cent within 1 year. Avoiding surgery was their main reason. In participants preferring surgery, many tolerated a recurrence risk of no more than 10 per cent when treated with antibiotics. Removal of the cause of appendicitis was their main reason. Around half of the average population sample preferred antibiotics over surgical treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis and were willing to accept a high recurrence risk to avoid surgery initially. Participants who preferred surgery tolerated only a very low recurrence risk with antibiotic treatment.
| S-EPMC8411439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-operative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is an option, but omission of antibiotics from the regimen has not been tested.MethodsA double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority RCT in adults with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis was designed to compare placebo with antibiotics (intravenous ertapenem followed by oral levofloxacin and metronidazole). The primary endpoint was treatment success (resolution resulting in discharge without appendicectomy within 10 days); secondary outcomes included pain scores, complications, hospital stay, and return to work.ResultsFrom May 2017 to September 2020, 72 patients with a mean(s.d.) age of 37.5 (11.1) years were recruited at five hospitals. Six were excluded after randomization (5 early consent withdrawals, 1 randomization protocol violation), 35 were assigned to receive antibiotics, and 31 to receive placebo. Enrolment challenges (including hospital pharmacy resources in an acute-care surgery setting) meant that only the lowest sample size of three predefined scenarios was achieved. The 10-day treatment success rate was 87 (95 per cent c.i. 75 to 99) per cent for placebo and 97 (92 to 100) per cent for antibiotics. This clinical difference of 10 (90 per cent c.i. -0.9 to 21) per cent was not statistically different for the primary outcome (1-sided P = 0.142), and secondary outcomes were similar.ConclusionThe lack of antibiotic superiority statistically suggests that a non-inferiority trial against placebo is warranted in adults with CT-confirmed mild appendicitis. Registration number: EudraCT 2015-003634-26 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/eudract-web/index.faces), NCT03234296 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
| S-EPMC10364767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionStudies evaluating the rate and histology of appendiceal neoplasms between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis include a small number of patients. Therefore, we sought a meta-analysis and systematic review comparing the rates and types of appendiceal neoplasm between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis.MethodsWe included articles published from the time of inception of the datasets to September 30, 2022. The electronic databases included English publications in Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus.ResultsA total of 4962 patients with appendicitis enrolled in 4 comparative studies were included. The mean age was 43.55 years (16- 94), and half were male (51%). Based on intra-operative findings, 1394 (38%) had complicated appendicitis, and 3558 (62%) had uncomplicated appendicitis. The overall incidence rate of neoplasm was 1.98%. No significant difference was found in the incidence rate of appendiceal neoplasm between complicated (3.29%) and uncomplicated (1.49%) appendicitis (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.16- 1.23; p < 0.087; I2 = 54.9%). The most common appendiceal neoplasms were Neuroendocrine Tumors (NET) (49.21%), Nonmucinous Adenocarcinoma (24.24%), Mixed Adeno-Neuroendocrine Tumor (MANEC) (11.40%), Mucinous Adenocarcinoma (4.44%). There was a significant difference between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis in rates of adenocarcinoma (50% vs. 13%), NET (31% vs. 74%), MANEC (19% vs. 13%) (P < 0.001).ConclusionWhile there was no significant difference in the overall neoplasm rate between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis, the NET rate was significantly higher in uncomplicated appendicitis. In comparison, the Adenocarcinoma rate was considerably higher in Complicated appendicitis. These findings emphasize the importance of evaluating risk factors for neoplasm when considering appendectomy in patients with appendicitis.
| S-EPMC10632310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOur objective was to identify predictors of successful nonoperative management (NOM) of uncomplicated appendicitis. We hypothesized that the absence of diabetes, absence of an appendicolith, short duration of symptoms, absence of systemic inflammation, and low modified Alvarado score would predict successful NOM.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 81 consecutive patients who underwent NOM of uncomplicated appendicitis. Successful NOM was defined as resolution of appendicitis with antibiotics alone and no recurrent appendicitis within 180 days. Patients with successful NOM (n = 36) were compared with patients who failed NOM (n = 45). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of successful NOM, expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Model strength was assessed by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).ResultsPatient age (35 years), the American Society of Anesthesiologists class (2.0), and Charlson comorbidity index (0.0) were similar between groups. Independent predictors of successful NOM were duration of symptoms prior to admission >25 hours: OR 4.17 (1.42-12.24), maximum temperature within 6 hours of admission <37.3°C: OR 8.07 (1.79-36.38), modified Alvarado score <4: OR 9.06 (1.26-64.93), and appendiceal diameter <13 mm: OR 17.55 (1.30-237.28); model AUC: 0.81 (0.72-0.90).ConclusionsPatients with a longer duration of symptoms prior to admission were more likely to have successful NOM. Other independent predictors of successful NOM included lower temperature, lower modified Alvarado score, and smaller appendiceal diameter. These findings provide a framework for clinical decision-making and large-scale derivation and validation of a model to predict successful NOM of uncomplicated appendicitis.
| S-EPMC5742042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHealth care professionals have shown significant interest in nonoperative management for uncomplicated appendicitis, but long-term population-level data are lacking.ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of nonoperatively managed appendicitis against appendectomy.Design, setting, and participantsThis national retrospective cohort study used claims data from a private insurance database to compare patients admitted with uncomplicated appendicitis from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2014, undergoing appendectomy vs nonoperative management. Coarsened exact matching was applied before multivariate analysis to reduce imbalance between groups. Data were analyzed from February 12 through May 1, 2018.ExposuresAppendectomy (control arm) or nonoperative management (treatment arm).Main outcomes and measuresShort-term primary clinical outcomes included emergency department visits, hospital readmission, abdominal abscess, and Clostridium difficile infections. Long-term primary clinical outcomes were small-bowel obstructions, incisional hernias, and appendiceal cancers. Nonoperative management failure was defined by hospital readmission with appendicitis diagnosis and an appendicitis-associated operation or procedure. Secondary outcomes included number of follow-up visits, length and cost of index hospitalization, and total cost of appendicitis-associated care. Covariates included age, sex, region, insurance plan type, admission year, and Charlson comorbidity index.ResultsOf 58 329 patients with uncomplicated appendicitis (52.7% men; mean [SD] age, 31.9 [16.5] years), 55 709 (95.5%) underwent appendectomy and 2620 (4.5%) underwent nonoperative management. Patients in the nonoperative management group were more likely to have appendicitis-associated readmissions (adjusted odds ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.63-2.77; P < .001) and to develop an abscess (adjusted odds ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.05-1.92; P = .02). Patients in the nonoperative management group required more follow-up visits in the year after index admission (unadjusted mean [SD], 1.6 [6.3] vs 0.3 [1.4] visits; adjusted +1.11 visits; P < .001) and had lower index hospitalization cost (unadjusted mean [SD], $11 502 [$9287] vs $13 551 [$10 160]; adjusted -$2117, P < .001), but total cost of appendicitis care was higher when follow-up care was considered (unadjusted, $14 934 [$31 122] vs $14 186 [$10 889]; adjusted +$785; P = .003). During a mean (SD) of 3.2 (1.7) years of follow-up, failure of nonoperative management occurred in 101 patients (3.9%); median time to recurrence was 42 days (interquartile range, 8-125 days). Among the patients who experienced treatment failure, 44 did so within 30 days.Conclusions and relevanceAccording to results of this study, nonoperative management failure rates were lower than previously reported. Nonoperative management was associated with higher rates of abscess, readmission, and higher overall cost of care. These data suggest that nonoperative management may not be the preferred first-line therapy for all patients with uncomplicated appendicitis.
| S-EPMC6439669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAppendicitis is classified as either complicated (CA) or uncomplicated (UA). Some authors have shown that the epidemiologic trends of CA and UA may differ. The aim of this study was to clarify differences in backgrounds and surgical outcomes between CA and UA patients.MethodsThis study was a cohort study. We extracted case data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database from January 2014 to December 2017. Patients were classified into three groups, depending on whether they underwent emergency appendectomy for CA (CA group), emergency appendectomy for UA (UA group), or elective appendectomy (EA group). We evaluated patient characteristics and surgical outcomes for each group.ResultsWe included 89,355 adult patients in the study, comprising 29,331 CA, 48,691 UA, and 11,333 EA patients. Old age, larger body mass index, smoking, and medication with antidiabetic drugs, oral corticosteroids, oral antiplatelet drugs, and oral anticoagulant drugs were independent risk factors for CA. The percentage of CA increased with age. In-hospital mortality (0.15%, 0.02%, and 0.00%) and 30-d mortality (0.09%, 0.01%, and 0.00%), respectively, of CA patients were significantly higher than those of the UA and EA groups. The duration of postoperative antibiotic administration, duration of fasting, and time before removal of a prophylactic drain were significantly longer in the CA group than in the UA and EA groups.ConclusionBackgrounds and treatment outcomes of CA and UA patients after emergency surgery are entirely different. Thus, the treatment strategy of CA and UA patients should differ accordingly.
| S-EPMC8889856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The development of deep learning algorithms for complex tasks in digital medicine has relied on the availability of large labeled training datasets, usually containing hundreds of thousands of examples. The purpose of this study was to develop a 3D deep learning model, AppendiXNet, to detect appendicitis, one of the most common life-threatening abdominal emergencies, using a small training dataset of less than 500 training CT exams. We explored whether pretraining the model on a large collection of natural videos would improve the performance of the model over training the model from scratch. AppendiXNet was pretrained on a large collection of YouTube videos called Kinetics, consisting of approximately 500,000 video clips and annotated for one of 600 human action classes, and then fine-tuned on a small dataset of 438 CT scans annotated for appendicitis. We found that pretraining the 3D model on natural videos significantly improved the performance of the model from an AUC of 0.724 (95% CI 0.625, 0.823) to 0.810 (95% CI 0.725, 0.895). The application of deep learning to detect abnormalities on CT examinations using video pretraining could generalize effectively to other challenging cross-sectional medical imaging tasks when training data is limited.
| S-EPMC7054445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of generalist radiologists working in a community setting against abdominal radiologists working in an academic setting for the interpretation of MR when diagnosing acute appendicitis among emergency department patients.MethodsThis observational study examined MR image interpretation (non-contrast MR with diffusion-weighted imaging and intravenous contrast-enhanced MR) from a prospectively enrolled cohort at an academic hospital over 18 months. Eligible patients had an abdominopelvic CT ordered to evaluate for appendicitis and were > 11 years old. The reference standard was a combination of surgery and pathology results, phone follow-up, and chart review. Six radiologists blinded to clinical information, three each from community and academic practices, independently interpreted MR and CT images in random order. We calculated test characteristics for both individual and group (consensus) diagnostic accuracy then performed Chi-square tests to identify any differences between the subgroups.ResultsAnalysis included 198 patients (114 women) with a mean age of 31.6 years and an appendicitis prevalence of 32.3%. For generalist radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 93.8% (84.6-98.0%) and 88.8% (82.2-93.2%) for MR and 96.9% (88.7-99.8%) and 91.8% (85.8-95.5%) for CT. For fellowship-trained radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.9% (88.2-99.5%) and 89.6% (82.8-94%) for MR and 98.4% (90.5-99.9%) and 93.3% (87.3-96.7%) for CT. No statistically significant differences were detected between radiologist groups (p = 1.0, p = 0.53, respectively) or when comparing MR to CT (p = 0.21, p = 0.17, respectively).ConclusionsMR is a reliable, radiation-free imaging alternative to CT for the evaluation of appendicitis in community-based generalist radiology practices.Key points• There was no significant difference in MR image interpretation accuracy between generalist and abdominal fellowship-trained radiologists when evaluating sensitivity (p = 1.0) and specificity (p = 0.53). • There was no significant difference in accuracy comparing MR to CT imaging for diagnosing appendicitis for either sensitivity (p = 0.21) or specificity (p = 0.17). • With experience, generalist radiologists enhanced their MR interpretation accuracy as demonstrated by improved interpretation sensitivity (OR 2.89 CI 1.44-5.77, p = 0.003) and decreased mean interpretation time (5 to 3.89 min).
| S-EPMC8665009 | biostudies-literature