Appendectomy versus conservative treatment with antibiotics for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a propensity score-matched analysis of patient-centered outcomes (the ACTUAA prospective multicenter trial).

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to compare antibiotic therapy and appendectomy as treatment for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis confirmed by ultrasound and/or computed tomography. METHODS: The study was conducted from January 2017 to January 2018. Data regarding all patients discharged from the participating centers with a diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Of the 318 patients enrolled in the study, 27.4% underwent antibiotic-first therapy, and 72.6% underwent appendectomy. The matched group was composed of 87 patients in both study arms. Of the 87 patients available of 1-year follow-up in the antibiotic-first group, 64 (73.6%) did not require appendectomy. The complication-free treatment success in the antibiotic-first group was 64.4%. A statistically significant higher complication-free treatment success was found in the appendectomy group: 81.8% in the pre-matching sample and 83.9% in the post-matching sample. Patients in the antibiotic-first group reported lower VAS scores compared to those treated with an appendectomy, both at discharge (2.0 ± 1.7 vs 3.6 ± 2.3) and at 30-day follow-up (0.3 ± 0.6 vs 2.1 ± 1.7). The mean of the days of absence from work was higher in the appendectomy group (ß 0.63; 95% CI 0.08-1.18). CONCLUSION: Although laparoscopic appendectomy remains the gold standard of treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, conservative treatment with antibiotics is a safe option in most cases. Approximately 65% of patients treated with antibiotics are symptom-free at 1 year, without increased risk of adverse events should symptoms recur, and better outcomes in terms of less pain and shorter period of absence from work compared to patients undergoing an appendectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03080103.

Current status on the adoption of high energy devices in Italy: An Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE) national survey.

BACKGROUND: In the past three decades, different High Energy Devices (HED) have been introduced in surgical practice to improve the efficiency of surgical procedures. HED allow vessel sealing, coagulation and transection as well as an efficient tissue dissection. This survey was designed to verify the current status on the adoption of HED in Italy. METHODS: A survey was conducted across Italian general surgery units. The questionnaire was composed of three sections (general information, elective surgery, emergency surgery) including 44 questions. Only one member per each surgery unit was allowed to complete the questionnaire. For elective procedures, the survey included questions on thyroid surgery, lower and upper GI surgery, proctologic surgery, adrenal gland surgery, pancreatic and hepatobiliary surgery, cholecystectomy, abdominal wall surgery and breast surgery. Appendectomy, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and bowel obstruction due to adhesions were considered for emergency surgery. The list of alternatives for every single question included a percentage category as follows: " < 25%, 25-50%, 51-75% or > 75%", both for open and minimally-invasive surgery. RESULTS: A total of 113 surgical units completed the questionnaire. The reported use of HED was high both in open and minimally-invasive upper and lower GI surgery. Similarly, HED were widely used in minimally-invasive pancreatic and adrenal surgery. The use of HED was wider in minimally-invasive hepatic and biliary tree surgery compared to open surgery, whereas the majority of the respondents reported the use of any type of HED in less than 25% of elective cholecystectomies. HED were only rarely employed also in the majority of emergency open and laparoscopic procedures, including cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and adhesiolysis. Similarly, very few respondents declared to use HED in abdominal wall surgery and proctology. The distribution of the most used type of HED varied among the different surgical interventions. US HED were mostly used in thyroid, upper GI, and adrenal surgery. A relevant use of H-US/RF devices was reported in lower GI, pancreatic, hepatobiliary and breast surgery. RF HED were the preferred choice in proctology. CONCLUSION: HED are extensively used in minimally-invasive elective surgery involving the upper and lower GI tract, liver, pancreas and adrenal gland. Nowadays, reasons for choosing a specific HED in clinical practice rely on several aspects, including surgeon's preference, economic features, and specific drawbacks of the energy employed.

A prospective non-randomized controlled, multicenter trial comparing Appendectomy and Conservative Treatment for Patients with Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis (the ACTUAA study).

PURPOSE: Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of lower abdominal pain and admissions to the emergency department. Over the past 20 years, there has been a renewed interest in the conservative management of uncomplicated AA, and several studies demonstrated that an antibiotic-first strategy is a viable treatment option for uncomplicated AA. The aim of this prospective non-randomized controlled, multicenter trial is to compare antibiotic therapy and emergency appendectomy as treatment for patients with uncomplicated AA confirmed by US and/or CT or MRI scan. METHODS: All adult patients in the age range 18 to 65 years with suspected AA, consecutively admitted to the Surgical Department of the 13 participating Italian Hospitals, will be invited to take part in the study. A multicenter prospective collected registry developed by surgeons, radiologists, and pathologists with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis represents the best research method to assess the long-term role of antibiotics in the management of the disease. Comparison will be made between surgical and antibiotic-first approaches to uncomplicated AA through the analysis of the primary outcome measure of complication-free treatment success rate based on 1-year follow-up. Quality of life, length of hospital stay, pain evaluation, and time to return to normal activity will be evaluated as secondary outcome measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03080103.

Acute cholecystitis during COVID-19 pandemic: a multisocietary position statement.

Following the spread of the infection from the new SARS-CoV2 coronavirus in March 2020, several surgical societies have released their recommendations to manage the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for the daily clinical practice. The recommendations on emergency surgery have fueled a debate among surgeons on an international level.We maintain that laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis, even in the COVID-19 era. Moreover, since laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not more likely to spread the COVID-19 infection than open cholecystectomy, it must be organized in such a way as to be carried out safely even in the present situation, to guarantee the patient with the best outcomes that minimally invasive surgery has shown to have.

[Pyogenic abscess in hepatic metastasis: unusual first manifestation of colorectal cancer. A case report]. / Metastasi ascessualizzata del fegato: insolita presentazione clinica del cancro colon-rettale. Caso clinico.

Pyogenic liver abscesses and colorectal cancer are rarely reported in association. Necrosis and infection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer are rare events which occur in the absence of systemic or local therapy. We report a case of a 72-year-old woman with a four day history of high fever, abdominal pain and a palpable mass in the right upper quadrant. Ultrasonography and CT scan showed a 13-cm solitary abscess in hepatic segment V-VI with multiple satellite metastases. For suspected imminent rupture into the peritoneal cavity a surgical drain was performed. Colorectal cancer was discovered during abdominal exploration and a colon resection was performed two weeks later. The search for the underlying cause of the pyogenic liver abscess should be an integral part of the correct management of liver abscesses. Association with a colorectal cancer is rare but should be taken into consideration.