In-hospital Delay of Appendectomy in Acute, Complicated Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Present theory is that uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis are different entities. Recent studies suggest it is safe to delay surgery in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. We hypothesize that patients with complicated appendicitis are at higher risk for postoperative complications when surgery is delayed. METHODS: Data was used from the multicenter, prospective SNAPSHOT appendicitis study of 1975 patients undergoing surgery for suspected appendicitis. Adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis were included in this study. The primary outcome was the difference in postoperative complications between patients with complicated appendicitis who were operated within and after 8 h after hospital presentation. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in relationship to delay of appendectomy. Follow-up was 30 days. A multivariable analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of 1341 adult patients with appendicitis, 34.3% had complicated appendicitis. In patients with complicated appendicitis, 22.8% developed a postoperative complication compared to 8.2% for uncomplicated appendicitis (P < 0.001). Delay in surgery (> 8 h) increased the complication rate in patients with complicated appendicitis (28.1%) compared to surgery within 8 h (18.3%; P = 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed a delay in surgery as an independent predictor for a postoperative complication in patients with complicated appendicitis (OR 1.71; 95%CI 1.01-2.68, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In-hospital delay of surgery (> 8 h) in patients with complicated appendicitis is associated with a higher risk of a postoperative complication. It is important that we recognize and treat these patients early.

Radiofrequency ablation for symptomatic, non-functioning, thyroid nodules: a single-center learning curve.

Objective: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is increasingly considered the prime option for treating symptomatic, benign, non-functioning thyroid nodules (NFTN). However, little is known about the degree of operator experience required to achieve optimal results. This study describes the RFA learning curve of a single-center team. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of the first 103 patients receiving RFA treatment for a single, symptomatic, and benign NFTN, with a follow-up of at least 1 year. The primary outcome measure was technique efficacy, defined as the percentage of patients with a 6-month nodal volume reduction ratio (VRR) >50% after single-session RFA. Optimal treatment efficacy was defined as a 6-month VRR >50% achieved in at least 75% of patients. Secondary outcomes were complications of RFA and indications of secondary interventions. Results: Median nodal volume at baseline was 12.0 mL (range 2.0-58.0 mL). A 6-month VRR >50% was achieved in 45% of the first 20 patients, 75% of the next 20, and 79% of the following 63 patients. Complications included minor bleeding (N = 4), transient hyperthyroidism (N = 4), and transient loss of voice (N = 1). Poor volume reduction or nodular regrowth led to diagnostic lobectomy in 11 patients and a second RFA in 5. Lobectomy revealed a follicular carcinoma (T2N0M0) in 2 patients. In 1 patient, nodule regrowth was caused by an intranodular solitary B-cell lymphoma. Conclusion: About 40 procedures are required to achieve a 6-month VRR >50% in the majority of patients. Appropriate follow-up with re-evaluation is recommended for all patients with a VRR <50% and in those with regrowth to exclude underlying malignancy.

Population preference for treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Diagnosis of Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis in Adults.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic work-up of acute appendicitis remains challenging. While some guidelines advise to use a risk stratification based on clinical parameters, others use standard imaging in all patients. As non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis has been identified as feasible and safe, differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is of paramount importance. We reviewed the literature to describe the optimal strategy for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. METHODS: A narrative review about the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adult patients was conducted. Both diagnostic strategies and goals were analyzed. RESULTS: For diagnosing acute appendicitis, both ruling in and ruling out the disease are important. Clinical and laboratory findings individually do not suffice, but when combined in a diagnostic score, a better risk prediction can be made for having acute appendicitis. However, for accurate diagnosis imaging seems obligatory in patients suspected for acute appendicitis. Scoring systems combining clinical and imaging features may differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and may enable ruling out complicated appendicitis. Within conservatively treated patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, predictive factors for non-responsiveness to antibiotics and recurrence of appendicitis need to be defined in order to optimize treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: Standard imaging increases the diagnostic power for both ruling in and ruling out acute appendicitis. Incorporating imaging features in clinical scoring models may provide better differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Optimizing patient selection for antibiotic treatment of appendicitis may minimize recurrence rates, resulting in better treatment outcomes.

Discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis by ultrasound imaging, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis is crucial. Patients with suspected complicated appendicitis are best treated by emergency surgery, whereas those with uncomplicated appendicitis may be treated with antibiotics alone. This study aimed to obtain summary estimates of the accuracy of ultrasound imaging, CT and MRI in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted by an electronic search in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for studies describing the diagnostic accuracy of complicated versus uncomplicated appendicitis. Studies were included if the population comprised adults, and surgery or pathology was used as a reference standard. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed with QUADAS-2. Bivariable logitnormal random-effect models were used to estimate mean sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Two studies reporting on ultrasound imaging, 11 studies on CT, one on MRI, and one on ultrasonography with conditional CT were included. Summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity in detecting complicated appendicitis could be calculated only for CT, because of lack of data for the other imaging modalities. For CT, mean sensitivity was 78 (95 per cent c.i. 64 to 88) per cent, and mean specificity was 91 (85 to 99) per cent. At a median prevalence of 25 per cent, the positive predictive value of CT for complicated appendicitis would be 74 per cent and its negative predictive value 93 per cent. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound imaging, CT and MRI have limitations in discriminating between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis. Although CT has far from perfect sensitivity, its negative predictive value for complicated appendicitis is high.

[Revised guideline for acute appendicitis. Amendments to diagnostics and treatment]. / Herziene richtlijn over acute appendicitis.

Recently, the revised guideline 'Guideline for diagnostics and treatment of acute appendicitis' was published by the Dutch Surgical Society. A patient with limited clinical symptoms and low suspicion of appendicitis can be assessed again at a later time, during which ultrasound diagnostics can be repeated. Following an inconclusive ultrasound scan in children who possibly have appendicitis, it is no longer recommended to perform diagnostic laparoscopy; rather, MRI diagnostics are indicated. In young adults with possible appendicitis, in whom a diagnosis cannot be established using ultrasound, the advice is to use MRI diagnostics instead of CT imaging; this particularly applies to women of child-bearing age. For patients with appendicitis an appendectomy remains the recommended treatment, although one can consider treating adults with suspected simple appendicitis with antibiotics alone. It is important that this decision is made in consultation with the patient. Laparoscopic appendectomy reduces the number of wound infections and admission length, and is therefore usually preferred over open method appendectomy. If a patient with appendicitis is 24-28 weeks pregnant,consultation with a specialist centre is indicated regarding the obstetric management and possibly referral.

[Acute appendicitis: treatment in accordance with new guideline]. / Acute appendicitis.

In this clinical lesson we present two patient cases. A 66-year-old female patient with a clinical, biochemical and radiological suspicion of complex appendicitis. The patient undergoes an appendectomy and post-operative recovery is beset with complications. The other case involves a 24-year-old male patient with suspected simple appendicitis. He is successfully treated with antibiotics and without surgery. By using these patients as examples, we discuss the revised clinical guideline for diagnosing and treating acute appendicitis. Besides that, we also discuss the differentiation between simple and complex appendicitis and how this can influence the treatment plan.