Two Days Versus Five Days of Postoperative Antibiotics for Complex Appendicitis: Cost Analysis of a Randomized, Noninferiority Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare costs for 2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics within the antibiotics after an aPPendectomy In Complex appendicitis trial.Background:Recent studies suggest that restrictive antibiotic use leads to a significant reduction in hospital stays without compromising patient safety. Its potential effect on societal costs remains underexplored. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, open-label, multicenter clinical trial powered for noninferiority. Patients with complex appendicitis (age ≥ 8 years) were randomly allocated to 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendectomy. Patient inclusion lasted from June 2017 to June 2021 in 15 Dutch hospitals. The final follow-up was on September 1, 2021. The primary trial endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. In the present study, the main outcome measures were overall societal costs (comprising direct health care costs and costs related to productivity loss) and cost-effectiveness. Direct health care costs were recorded based on data in the electronic patient files, complemented by a telephone follow-up at 90 days. In addition, data on loss of productivity were acquired through the validated Productivity Cost Questionnaire at 4 weeks after surgery. Cost estimates were based on prices for the year 2019. RESULTS: In total, 1005 patients were evaluated in the "intention-to-treat" analysis: 502 patients were allocated to the 2-day group and 503 to the 5-day group. The mean difference in overall societal costs was - €625 (95% CI: -€ 958 to -€ 278) to the advantage of the 2-day group. This difference was largely explained by reduced hospital stay. Productivity losses were similar between the study groups. Restricting postoperative antibiotics to 2 days was cost-effective, with estimated cost savings of €31,117 per additional infectious complication. CONCLUSIONS: Two days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis results in a statistically significant and relevant cost reduction, as compared with 5 days. Findings apply to laparoscopic appendectomy in a well-resourced health care setting.

2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis: a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate duration of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis is unclear. The increasing global threat of antimicrobial resistance warrants restrictive antibiotic use, which could also reduce side-effects, length of hospital stay, and costs. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority trial in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, patients with complex appendicitis (aged ≥8 years) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendicectomy. Randomisation was stratified by centre, and treating physicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. The main outcome was the absolute risk difference (95% CI) in the primary endpoint, adjusted for age and severity of appendicitis, with a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. Outcome assessment was based on electronic patient records and a telephone consultation 90 days after appendicectomy. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. Safety outcomes were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NL5946. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2017, and June 3, 2021, 13 267 patients were screened and 1066 were randomly assigned, 533 to each group. 31 were excluded from intention-to-treat analysis of the 2-day group and 30 from the 5-day group owing to errors in recruitment or consent. Appendicectomy was done laparoscopically in 955 (95%) of 1005 patients. The telephone follow-up was completed in 664 (66%) of 1005 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 51 (10%) of 502 patients analysed in the 2-day group and 41 (8%) of 503 patients analysed in the 5-day group (adjusted absolute risk difference 2·0%, 95% CI -1·6 to 5·6). Rates of complications and re-interventions were similar between trial groups. Fewer patients had adverse effects of antibiotics in the 2-day group (45 [9%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (112 [22%] of 503 patients; odds ratio [OR] 0·344, 95% CI 0·237 to 0·498). Re-admission to hospital was more frequent in the 2-day group (58 [12%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (29 [6%] of 503 patients; OR 2·135, 1·342 to 3·396). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: 2 days of postoperative intravenous antibiotics for complex appendicitis is non-inferior to 5 days in terms of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days, based on a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. These findings apply to laparoscopic appendicectomy conducted in a well resourced health-care setting. Adopting this strategy will reduce adverse effects of antibiotics and length of hospital stay. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Selection of patients for hepatic surgery of colorectal cancer liver metastasis based on genomic aberrations.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether genomic aberrations in primary colorectal cancer (CRC) can identify patients who are at increased risk of developing additional hepatic recurrence after colorectal liver metastases (CLM) resection. METHODS: Primary tumour DNA from 79 CLM resected patients was analysed for recurrent copy number changes (12x135k NimbleGen(™) aCGH). The cohort was divided into three groups: CLM patients with a recurrence-free survival after hepatic resection of at least 5 years (n = 21), patients who developed intra-hepatic recurrence (n = 32), and patients who developed extrahepatic recurrence (n = 26). By contrasting the primary tumour profiles of recurrence free and the extrahepatic recurrence CLM patients, a classifier, the extra-hepatic recurrence classifier (ERC1), predictive for subsequent extrahepatic-recurrence was developed. RESULTS: The ERC1 had an accuracy of 70 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): 55-82 %, misclassification error 30 %, base error rate: 45 %). This analysis identified a region on Chromosome 12p13 as differentially aberrated between these two groups. The classifier was further optimized by contrasting the extrahepatic recurrence group with the combined group of intrahepatic and no recurrence group, resulting in an extrahepatic prognostic classifier (ERC2) able to classify patients with CLMs suitable for hepatic resection with 74 % accuracy (95 % CI: 62-83 %, misclassification error 26 %, base error rate: 32 %). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CLM who will develop extrahepatic recurrence may be identified with ERCs based on information in the primary tumour. Risk estimates for the occurrence of extrahepatic metastases may allow a reduction of hepatic resections of colorectal liver metastases for those who are unlikely to develop extrahepatic metastases.

Evaluation of image registration in PET/CT of the liver and recommendations for optimized imaging.

UNLABELLED: Multimodality PET/CT of the liver can be performed with an integrated (hybrid) PET/CT scanner or with software fusion of dedicated PET and CT. Accurate anatomic correlation and good image quality of both modalities are important prerequisites, regardless of the applied method. Registration accuracy is influenced by breathing motion differences on PET and CT, which may also have impact on (attenuation correction-related) artifacts, especially in the upper abdomen. The impact of these issues was evaluated for both hybrid PET/CT and software fusion, focused on imaging of the liver. METHODS: Thirty patients underwent hybrid PET/CT, 20 with CT during expiration breath-hold (EB) and 10 with CT during free breathing (FB). Ten additional patients underwent software fusion of dedicated PET and dedicated expiration breath-hold CT (SF). The image registration accuracy was evaluated at the location of liver borders on CT and uncorrected PET images and at the location of liver lesions. Attenuation-correction artifacts were evaluated by comparison of liver borders on uncorrected and attenuation-corrected PET images. CT images were evaluated for the presence of breathing artifacts. RESULTS: In EB, 40% of patients had an absolute registration error of the diaphragm in the craniocaudal direction of >1 cm (range, -16 to 44 mm), and 45% of lesions were mispositioned >1 cm. In 50% of cases, attenuation-correction artifacts caused a deformation of the liver dome on PET of >1 cm. Poor compliance to breath-hold instructions caused CT artifacts in 55% of cases. In FB, 30% had registration errors of >1 cm (range, -4 to 16 mm) and PET artifacts were less extensive, but all CT images had breathing artifacts. As SF allows independent alignment of PET and CT, no registration errors or artifacts of >1 cm of the diaphragm occurred. CONCLUSION: Hybrid PET/CT of the liver may have significant registration errors and artifacts related to breathing motion. The extent of these issues depends on the selected breathing protocol and the speed of the CT scanner. No protocol or scanner can guarantee perfect image fusion. On the basis of these findings, recommendations were formulated with regard to scanner requirements, breathing protocols, and reporting.