Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2017. Acute appendicitis (inflammation of the appendix) can be simple or complicated. Appendiceal phlegmon and appendiceal abscess are examples of complicated appendicitis. Appendiceal phlegmon is a diffuse inflammation in the bottom right of the appendix, while appendiceal abscess is a discrete inflamed mass in the abdomen that contains pus. Appendiceal phlegmon and abscess account for 2% to 10% of acute appendicitis. People with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess usually need an appendicectomy to relieve their symptoms (e.g. abdominal pain, loss of appetite, nausea, and vomiting) and avoid complications (e.g. peritonitis (infection of abdominal lining)). Surgery for people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess may be early (immediately after hospital admission or within a few days of admission), or delayed (several weeks later in a subsequent hospital admission). The optimal timing of appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess is debated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of early appendicectomy compared to delayed appendicectomy on overall morbidity and mortality in people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and five trials registers on 11 June 2023, together with reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all individual and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of language, publication status, or age of participants, comparing early versus delayed appendicectomy in people with appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight RCTs that randomised 828 participants to early or delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon (7 trials) or appendiceal abscess (1 trial). The studies were conducted in the USA, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. All RCTs were at high risk of bias because of lack of blinding and lack of published protocols. They were also unclear about methods of randomisation and length of follow-up. 1. Early versus delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon We included seven trials involving 788 paediatric and adult participants with appendiceal phlegmon: 394 of the participants were randomised to the early appendicectomy group (open or laparoscopic appendicectomy as soon as the appendiceal mass resolved within the same admission), and 394 were randomised to the delayed appendicectomy group (initial conservative treatment followed by delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy several weeks later). There was no mortality in either group. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of early appendicectomy on overall morbidity (risk ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 2.86; 3 trials, 146 participants; very low-certainty evidence), the proportion of participants who developed wound infections (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.02; 7 trials, 788 participants), and the proportion of participants who developed faecal fistulas (RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.36 to 8.49; 5 trials, 388 participants). Early appendicectomy may reduce the abdominal abscess rate (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.80; 4 trials, 626 participants; very low-certainty evidence), reduce the total length of hospital stay by about two days (mean difference (MD) -2.02 days, 95% CI -3.13 to -0.91; 5 trials, 680 participants), and increase the time away from normal activities by about five days (MD 5.00 days; 95% CI 1.52 to 8.48; 1 trial, 40 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. 2. Early versus delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for appendiceal abscess We included one trial involving 40 paediatric participants with appendiceal abscess: 20 were randomised to the early appendicectomy group (emergent laparoscopic appendicectomy), and 20 were randomised to the delayed appendicectomy group (initial conservative treatment followed by delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy 10 weeks later). There was no mortality in either group. The trial did not report on overall morbidity, various complications, or time away from normal activities. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of early appendicectomy on the total length of hospital stay (MD -0.20 days, 95% CI -3.54 to 3.14; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For the comparison of early versus delayed open or laparoscopic appendicectomy for paediatric and adult participants with appendiceal phlegmon, very low-certainty evidence suggests that early appendicectomy may reduce the abdominal abscess rate. The evidence is very uncertain whether early appendicectomy prevents overall morbidity or other complications. Early appendicectomy may reduce the total length of hospital stay and increase the time away from normal activities, but the evidence is very uncertain. For the comparison of early versus delayed laparoscopic appendicectomy for paediatric participants with appendiceal abscess, data are sparse, and we cannot rule out significant benefits or harms of early versus delayed appendicectomy. Further trials on this topic are urgently needed and should specify a set of criteria for use of antibiotics, percutaneous drainage of the appendiceal abscess prior to surgery, and resolution of the appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. Future trials should include outcomes such as time away from normal activities and length of hospital stay.

Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection and prophylactic appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: The risk-benefit balance of prophylactic appendectomy in patients undergoing left colorectal cancer resection is unclear. The aim of this report is to assess the proportion of histologically abnormal appendices in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection in a unit where standard of care is appendectomy, with consent, when left-sided resection is performed. METHODS: A retrospective study on a prospectively collected database was conducted in a single tertiary-care center. Overall, 717 consecutive patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection between January 2015 and June 2021 were analyzed. The primary outcome was the proportion of histologically abnormal appendix specimens at prophylactic appendectomy. The secondary outcome was complications from prophylactic appendectomy. RESULTS: Overall, 576/717 (80%) patients had appendectomy at colorectal cancer surgery. In total, 234/576 (41%) had a right-/extended-right hemicolectomy or subtotal colectomy which incorporates appendectomy, and 342/576 (59%) had left-sided resection (left-hemicolectomy, anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision) with prophylactic appendectomy. At definitive histology, 534/576 (92.7%) had a normal appendix. The remaining 42/576 (7.3%) showed abnormal findings, including: 14/576 (2.4%) inflammatory appendix pathology, 2/576 (0.3%) endometriosis, 8/576 (1.4%) hyperplastic polyp, and 18/576 (3.1%) appendix tumors, which encompassed six low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs), three carcinoids, and nine serrated polyps. In the 342 patients who had prophylactic appendectomy, 10 (2.9%) had a neoplasm (two LAMN, three carcinoids, and five serrated polyps). There were no complications attributable to appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection is uncommon when prophylactic appendectomy was performed. However, approximately 3% of patients had a synchronous appendix neoplasm.

Cost and Late Hospital Care of Publicly Insured Children After Appendectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Immediate complications of appendicitis are common, but the prevalence of long-term complications is uncertain. METHODS: We studied all publicly-insured children in the US with uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis in 2018-2019 using administrative claims. The main outcome was late hospital care defined as hospitalization or abdominal procedure within 180 d of an appendicitis discharge, excluding interval appendectomies. Time to late hospital care was evaluated using Cox regression. We evaluated health-care expenditures arising from appendicitis episodes. RESULTS: Among 95,942 children with appendicitis, 5727 (6.0%) had late hospital care, with 5062 requiring rehospitalization and 2012 (2.1%) surgery. The median time to late hospital care was 10 d (interquartile range 4-33). Age under 5 y (compared with >14 y, hazard ratio [HR] 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.70-2.08), complex chronic conditions (HR 2.35, 95% CI 2.13-2.59), and complicated appendicitis (HR 2.81, 95% CI 2.67, 2.96) were each associated with time to late hospital care. Expenditures over 180 d were a median $6553 and $19,589 respectively in those requiring no late hospital care versus those requiring it (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Late hospital care is uncommon in pediatric appendicitis but is costly. Prevention efforts should be targeted to the youngest, most complex children, and those with complicated appendicitis at presentation.

Systemic glucocorticoid exposure and postoperative infection risk in 143,782 appendectomy patients-a Danish longitudinal nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids are conventionally associated with increased postoperative infection risk. It is necessary to clarify if preoperative glucocorticoid exposure is associated with postoperative infection in appendectomy patients and if the association is different for open and laparoscopic appendectomies. METHODS: A Danish nationwide study of appendectomy patients between 1996 and 2018. Exposures were defined as high (≥ 5 mg) versus no/low (< 5 mg) glucocorticoid exposure in milligram prednisone-equivalents/day preoperatively. The main outcome was any postoperative infection. Then, 90-day cumulative incidences (absolute risk) and adjusted hazard ratios (relative risk) of the outcome were calculated for high versus no/low glucocorticoid exposure within all appendectomies and within open and laparoscopic subgroups. Propensity-score matching was used for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Of 143,782 patients, median age was 29 years, 74,543 were female, and 7654 experienced at least one infection during the 90-day follow-up. The 90-day cumulative incidence for postoperative infection was 5.3% within the no/low glucocorticoid exposure group and 10.0% within the high glucocorticoid exposure group. Compared to no/low glucocorticoid exposure, adjusted hazard ratios for 90-day postoperative infection with high glucocorticoid exposure were 1.25 [95% CI 1.02-1.52; p = 0.03] for all appendectomies, 1.59 [1.16-2.18; p = 0.004] for laparoscopic appendectomies, and 1.09 [0.85-1.40; p = 0.52] for open appendectomies (pinteraction < 0.001). The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Preoperative high (≥ 5 mg/day) glucocorticoid exposure was associated with increased absolute risk of postoperative infections in open and laparoscopic appendectomies. The relative risk increase was significant for laparoscopic but not open appendectomies, possibly due to lower absolute risk with no/low glucocorticoid exposure in the laparoscopic subgroup.

Conventional herniorrhaphy followed by laparoscopic appendectomy for a variant of Amyand's hernia: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Amyand's hernia (AH) is an appendix (with or without acute inflammation) trapped within an inguinal hernia. Most AH with acute appendicitis had a preexisting appendix within the hernia sac. We herein report a variant of AH that has never been described before. An inflamed appendix that was managed conservatively was found to have migrated and trapped in the sac of a previously unrecognized right inguinal hernia 6 weeks after the index admission, resulting in a secondary Amyand's hernia. CASE PRESENTATION: A 25-year-old healthy Taiwanese woman had persistent right lower abdominal pain for 1 week and was diagnosed with perforated appendicitis with a localized abscess by abdominal computed tomography (CT). No inguinal hernia was noted at that time. Although the inflamed appendix along with the abscess was deeply surrounded by bowel loops so that percutaneous drainage was not feasible, it was treated successfully with antibiotics. However, she was rehospitalized 6 weeks later for having a painful right inguinal bulging mass for a week. Abdominal CT revealed an inflamed appendix with abscess formation in an indirect inguinal hernia raising the question of a Amyand's hernia with a perforated appendicitis. Via a typical inguinal herniorrhaphy incision, surgical exploration confirmed the diagnosis, and it was managed by opening the hernial sac to drain the abscess and reducing the appendix into the peritoneal cavity, followed by conventional tissue-based herniorrhaphy and a laparoscopic appendectomy. She was then discharged uneventfully and remained well for 11 months. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike the traditional definition of Amyand's hernia, where the appendix is initially in the hernia sac, the current case demonstrated that Amyand's hernia could be a type of delayed presentation following initial medical treatment of acute appendicitis. However, it can still be managed successfully by a conventional tissue-based herniorrhaphy followed by laparoscopic appendectomy.

Comparison of Hem-o-lok and Endoloop for Appendiceal Stump Closure in Laparoscopic Appendectomy: An Observational Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy has gained prominence in the management of acute appendicitis, necessitating secure closure of the appendiceal stump. Two common techniques for this purpose are Hem-o-lok clips (HC) and endoloops (EL), each offering distinct advantages. AIMS: This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of the HC and EL closure techniques. Specifically, the study focused on postoperative complications, hospital stays, and readmission rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective database review was conducted from November 2022 to August 2023. The study compared outcomes, postoperative complications, and the length of hospital stay in 123 patients who underwent appendiceal stump closure with HC and EL at the General Surgery Department of the Turkish Hospital in Doha, Qatar. RESULTS: Among the 123 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, appendiceal stump closure was performed with HC in 50 patients and EL in 73 patients. Six patients experienced infectious complications associated with the procedure. The hospital stays were similar in both groups (Group HC: 1.3 ± 2 days, Group EL: 1.4 ± 2 days), and there were two readmissions in each group.  Conclusion: The study supports the equivalence of HC and EL closure techniques. Both methods demonstrate comparable postoperative complications, hospital stays, and readmission rates. Surgeons can make informed decisions based on patient profiles and available resources.

The uncommon preoperative diagnosis of a De Garengeot hernia and its more novel laparoscopic treatment.

This case report involves an elderly woman who presented with a 3-day history of a tender groin swelling on her right side. Her admission bloods were fairly unremarkable, but a preoperative ultrasound impressively confirmed a femoral hernia containing the appendix (De Garengeot hernia) and she underwent emergency laparoscopic hernioplasty with a prosthetic mesh and appendicectomy. The procedure found an incarcerated hernia with a strangulated tip of the appendix that unexpectedly separated upon gentle manipulation and histopathology revealed appendiceal inflammation. There were no complications with the patient's recovery and she was discharged 2 days after surgery.

Is LigaSure Alone Sufficient for the Closure of the Appendix Stump?

PURPOSES: Closure of the appendix stump is necessary for laparoscopic appendectomy. Problems that occur during the appendix stump closure can cause severe morbidity. Several methods of stump closure have been described. This study aimed to investigate the adequacy of LigaSure alone in closing the appendix stump. METHODS: Patients who were operated on with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis between October 2021 and January 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to the closure technique of the appendix stump hemoclip(group I) and LigaSure only(group II). In addition, demographic data (age, gender), body mass index (BMI), presence of comorbid disease, perioperative appendicitis classification, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, radiological and pathological appendix size of the patients included in the study were recorded. Clavien Dindo was used for postoperative complication assessment. RESULT: The study included 77 patients. 48(62.3%) of the patients were in group I, and 29(37.7%) were in group II. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding age, gender distribution, BMI, presence of comorbid disease (P > .05). The operation time of group I was longer than group II (P < .001). There was no difference between the groups in terms of both radiological and pathological appendix size. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding postoperative complications and severity of complications (P = .76, P = .99, respectively). CONCLUSION: Appendiceal stump closure can be performed with Ligasure, but it should be noted that this procedure can be performed on selected patients, as in the study group, not on all patients.

Risk factors for complications after emergency surgery for paediatric appendicitis: a national prospective observational cohort study.

Appendicectomy is a common procedure in children with a low risk of mortality, however, complication rates and risk factors are largely unknown. This study aimed to characterise the incidence and epidemiology of postoperative complications in children undergoing appendicectomy in the UK. This multicentre prospective observational cohort study, which included children aged 1-16 y who underwent surgery for suspected appendicitis, was conducted between November 2019 and January 2022. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative morbidity. Data collected included: patient characteristics; comorbidities; and physiological status. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for poor outcomes. Data from 2799 children recruited from 80 hospitals were analysed, of which 185 (7%) developed postoperative complications. Children from black and 'other' minority ethnic groups were at significantly higher risk of poor outcomes: OR (95%CI) 4.13 (1.87-9.08), p < 0.001 and 2.08 (1.12-3.87), p = 0.021, respectively. This finding was independent of socio-economic status and type of appendicitis found on histology. Other risk factors for complications included: ASA physical status ≥ 3 (OR (95%CI) 4.05 (1.70-9.67), p = 0.002); raised C-reactive protein (OR 95%CI 1.01 (1.00-1.01), p < 0.001); pyrexia (OR (95%CI) 1.77(1.20-2.63), p = 0.004); and peri-operative oxygen supplementation (OR (95%CI) 4.20 (1.44-12.24), p = 0.009). In the UK NHS, which is a universally accessible healthcare system, ethnicity, but not socio-economic status, was associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications in children having surgery for acute appendicitis. Further evaluations and interventions are required to address this health inequality in keeping with NHS and international priorities.

Laparoscopic appendectomy with single port vs conventional access: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Conventional three-access laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) is currently the gold standard treatment, however, Single-Port Laparoscopic Appendectomy (SILA) has been proposed as an alternative. The aim of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate safety and efficacy of SILA compared with conventional approach. METHODS: Per PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CLA vs SILA for acute appendicitis. The randomised Mantel-Haenszel method was used for the meta-analysis. Statistical data analysis was performed with the Review Manager software and the risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane "Risk of Bias" assessment tool. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies (RCTs) were selected (2646 patients). The operative time was significantly longer in the SILA group (MD = 7,32), confirmed in both paediatric (MD = 9,80), (Q = 1,47) and adult subgroups (MD = 5,92), (Q = 55,85). Overall postoperative morbidity was higher in patients who underwent SILA, but the result was not statistically significant. In SILA group were assessed shorter hospital stays, fewer wound infections and higher conversion rate, but the results were not statistically significant. Meta-analysis was not performed about cosmetics of skin scars and postoperative pain because different scales were used in each study. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis show that SILA, although associated with fewer postoperative wound infection, has a significantly longer operative time. Furthermore, the risk of postoperative general complications is still present. Further studies will be required to analyse outcomes related to postoperative pain and the cosmetics of the surgical scar.

Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendicectomy- a systematic review.

AIM: There is currently an increased focus on competency-based training, in which training and assessment play a crucial role. The aim of this systematic review is to create an overview of hands-on training methods and assessment tools for appendicectomy and colon and rectal surgery procedures using either an open, laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach. METHOD: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted the last search on 9 March 2023. All published papers describing hands-on training, evaluation of performance data and development of assessment tools were eligible. The quality of studies and the validity evidence of assessment tools are reported. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were identified. Laparoscopic assessment tools are abundant, but the literature still lacks good-quality assessment tools for open appendicectomy, robotic colectomy and open rectal surgery. Overall, there is a lack of discussion regarding the establishment of pass/fail standards and the consequences of assessment. Virtual reality simulation is used more for appendicectomy than colorectal procedures. Only a few of the studies investigating training were of acceptable quality. There is a need for high-quality studies in open and robotic-assisted colon surgery and all approaches to rectal surgery. CONCLUSION: This review provides an overview of current training methods and assessment tools and identifies where more research is needed based on the quality of the studies and the current validity evidence.

Is transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy feasible for complicated appendicitis? A single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted surgery (TULS) mixed benefits of laparoscopic and open surgeries. Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (TULAA) is a well-known procedure, accepted and currently used by pediatric surgeons for treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis (UA). There is no current agreement in its use for the complicated appendiceal infections (CA). We reported our results using TULAA for both UA and CA. METHODS: We retrospectively collected TULAA performed between April 2017 and April 2022. Appendicitis were classified in UA and CA. We analyzed conversion rate, operative time, length of stay, surgical site infections (SSIs) rate, postoperative intra-abdominal abscess and costs. RESULTS: Over 5 years, 316 children underwent TULAA. Conversion rate was 3%. Mean age at surgery was 9.36 years (IQR 2-16). Forty-nine appendicitis were CA. Operative time and hospital stay was higher in CA than in UA group (38.33 vs. 60.73 min, p < 0.00001; 4 vs. 7 days, p < 0.00001). SSIs rate showed no statistically significant difference between two groups. Incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal collections was 11% in CA and 1% in UA. TULAA's cost was 192.07 €. CONCLUSION: In our series, TULAA seems to be safe, feasible and cost-effective for both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis, with no disadvantage in terms of outcomes compared to what is reported in literature for CLS.

Single-incision versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

While consensus on single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) for acute appendicitis is lacking, our meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of SILA compared to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA). A computer-based search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang, China Biological Medicine (CBM), PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SILA with CTLA groups. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. A total of 26 RCTs were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that, compared to the CTLA group, the SILA group had a longer operation time [MD = 7.97, 95 % CI (5.84, 10.10), P < 0.00001], and a higher rate of conversion to open surgery [RR = 2.60, 95 % CI (1.27, 5.31), P = 0.009], but had a shorter time to return to normal activities [MD = -0.76, 95 % CI (-1.15, -0.37), P = 0.0001]. Additionally, the SILA group had higher satisfaction scores [SMD = 1.21, 95 % CI (0.75, 1.68), P < 0.00001] and cosmetic scores [SMD = 0.68, 95 % CI (0.45, 0.90), P < 0.00001]. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pain scores at 24 h postoperatively [MD = -0.21, 95 % CI (-0.56, 0.14), P = 0.25], the incidence of wound infection [RR = 1.13, 95 % CI (0.74, 1.73), P = 0.58], or the overall complication rate [RR = 0.86, 95 % CI (0.66, 1.12), P = 0.27]. SILA is a safe and effective surgical approach that allows patients to recover to normal activities earlier, particularly for patients with a strong demand for better cosmetic outcomes. However, the quality of some RCTs in this meta-analysis is low, and further verification is needed through future high-quality RCTs.

Nonoperative Treatment of Diverticulitis and Appendicitis: Which Antibiotic Regimen Fails?

INTRODUCTION: Diverticulitis and appendicitis are common emergency general surgical conditions. Both can be treated with antibiotics alone; however, no antibiotic regimen has been identified as superior to others. In this study, we review different antibiotic regimens and their rates of failure. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients treated empirically with antibiotics for diverticulitis or appendicitis from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020, at an independent academic hospital in the Midwest. RESULTS: A total of 587 (appendicitis, n = 43; diverticulitis, n = 544) patients were included in the cohort. They were equally male (49%) and female (51%) with a median age of 59 y. Three major antibiotic classes were compared: cephalosporin + metronidazole (C + M), penicillins, and quinolone + metronidazole. Appendicitis patients were more likely to receive C + M for empiric treatment (73%, P < 0.001), while diverticulitis patients were more likely to receive quinolone + metronidazole (45%, P < 0.001). Patients empirically treated with antibiotics for appendicitis were more likely than those treated for diverticulitis to require additional antibiotics or procedure within 90 d (33% versus 13%, respectively; P = 0.005). Empiric treatment with C + M for diverticulitis was more likely to be associated with the need for additional antibiotics or procedures within 90 d than treatment with other regimens (P = 0.003). Choice of antibiotic for empiric treatment did not correlate with death at 90 d for appendicitis or diverticulitis. Diverticulitis patients who were initially treated as inpatients and were prescribed C + M at hospital discharge had a higher rate of death than those who were prescribed the other antibiotics (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Empiric antibiotic treatment of appendicitis is more likely to be associated with additional antibiotics or procedure when compared with diverticulitis; however, antibiotic choice did not correlate with any of the other outcomes. Empiric treatment with a C + M for diverticulitis was more likely to be correlated with the need for additional antibiotics or procedure within 90 d.

Revising a laparoscopic appendicectomy set to reduce reliance on disposable surgical instruments: supporting the transition to sustainable surgical practice.

INTRODUCTION: After excluding anaesthetic gases, around one-third of carbon emissions from surgical procedures are from consumables. This sustainable quality improvement project revised the laparoscopic appendicectomy surgical set at a large teaching hospital, with the aim of reducing unnecessary usage of disposable laparoscopic ports and surgical instruments. METHODS: A prospective audit of 25 consecutive laparoscopic appendicectomies (5% of annual appendicectomies performed at the Trust) was conducted to assess use of disposable instruments. The financial and environmental costs of the five most commonly used disposable instruments were calculated and annual cost of current practice determined. A revised surgical set was created to include additional reusable instruments and new reusable ports. A reaudit of disposable surgical instrument usage was conducted and the financial and environmental impact of the new set compared with the results from the initial audit. RESULTS: A total of 109 disposable instruments were opened in 25 appendicectomies, costing an estimated £49,656 and 692kg CO2 equivalent (CO2e) annually. Following rollout of the revised appendicectomy set, there was a significant reduction in disposable instrument usage (median four versus one instruments per case, p<0.00001). The revised set is predicted to reduce annual disposable instrument usage from 2,180 to 705 instruments (68% reduction), saving £219,452 and 3.02 tonnes CO2e over the estimated seven-year lifecycle of the reusable instruments. CONCLUSIONS: Updating a laparoscopic appendicectomy set to include additional/new reusable instruments can lead to a marked reduction in disposable surgical instrument usage. This results in significant projected financial and CO2e savings.

Intraoperative bacterial cultures fail to reliably predict the bacterial spectrum encountered during infectious complications after appendicitis.

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency. Complicated appendicitis usually warrants perioperative antibiotic treatment in order to prevent infectious complications. Whether routine microbiological testing benefits the individual patient is a topic of debate. The goal of our study was to assess perioperative antibiotic prescriptions as well as the benefit of microbiological testing during the appendectomy as a predictor for bacteria encountered in infectious complications. This is a retrospective analysis of 1218 consecutive patients that underwent appendectomy at a tertiary referral center between 2014 and 2021. The patient charts were systematically analyzed regarding intraoperative outcome, microbiologic results, and postoperative infectious complications. 1218 patients were included in this study of which 768 were uncomplicated appendicitis (UA) and 450 were complicated appendicitis (CA). Microbiological testing was performed in 39.2% of UA cases (33.6% of which grew bacteria) compared to 74.9% of CA cases (78.6% positive cultures). The strongest individual predictors for SSI were gangrenous and perforated appendicitis. A total of 58 surgical-site infections developed, of which 49 were intra-abdominal fluid collections or abscesses. Thirty-two patients had revision surgery or CT-guided drainage for SSI. In the cases where microbiological testing was done both during the appendectomy and the SSI, 13/18 showed different bacteria on culture testing. The infectious outcome was favorable in 98.3%. While microbiological testing offers insights into resistance patterns, it is of little benefit for the individual patient, given the low predictive value for bacteria found during SSI. Achieving source control combined with empiric antibiotic coverage leads to favorable outcomes independent of culture results.

Impact of surgical site infection after open and laparoscopic surgery among paediatric appendicitis patients: A meta-analysis.

Operative site wound infection is one of the most frequent infections in surgery. A variety of studies have shown that the results of laparoscopy might be superior to those of an open procedure. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of clarity as to whether there is a difference between open and laparoscopy with respect to the occurrence of wound infections in different paediatric operations. In this review, we looked at randomized, controlled studies that directly measured the rate of wound infection following an appendectomy with a laparoscope. We looked up four main databases for randomized, controlled studies that compare the treatment of paediatric appendicitis with laparoscopy. The surgeries included appendectomy. Through our search, we have determined 323 related papers and selected five qualified ones to be analysed according to the eligibility criteria. Five trials were also assessed for the quality of the documents. In the 5 trials, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of post-operative wound infection among the paediatric appendectomy and the open-access group (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-1.15, p = 0.13). The four trials did not show any statistically significant difference in abdominal abscesses among the laparoscopic and open-access treatment groups (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.90-3.01, p = 0.11). The four trials did not reveal any statistically significant difference in operating time (mean difference, -4.36; 95% CI, -17.31 to 8.59, p = 0.51). In light of these findings, the use of laparoscopy as compared with the open-approach approach in paediatric appendectomies is not associated with a reduction in the risk of wound infection.