Antibiotics versus placebo in adults with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis (APPAC III): randomized double-blind superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-operative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is an option, but omission of antibiotics from the regimen has not been tested. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: From 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. CONCLUSION: The 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).

Appendicitis was the most common reason for emergency surgery, but we now know that mild and severe acute appendicitis are two different diseases. Severe appendicitis still necessitates removal of the appendix but antibiotics alone are an option for mild disease. This small study found that most cases of mild appendicitis to resolve even without antibiotics. Larger studies (more patients) would be needed to show that omitting antibiotics is safe and no worse than antibiotic therapy for milder acute appendicitis.

Diagnostic accuracy using low-dose versus standard radiation dose CT in suspected acute appendicitis: prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced CT is the reference standard used in diagnostic imaging for acute appendicitis in adults. The radiation dose has been of concern. This study aimed to assess whether a lower radiation dose would affect the diagnostic accuracy of CT. METHODS: This was a prospective single-centre cohort study of patients (aged over 16 years) with suspected appendicitis evaluated for enrolment in concurrent APPAC II-III trials. The diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced low- and standard-dose CT was compared with study protocols guiding imaging based on BMI; this enabled direct CT imaging comparison only in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2. The on-call CT diagnosis was compared with the final clinical diagnosis. RESULTS: Among all 856 patients investigated, the accuracy of low-dose (454 patients) and standard-dose (402 patients) CT in identifying patients with and without appendicitis was 98·0 and 98·5 per cent respectively. In patients with a BMI under 30 kg/m2, respective values were 98·2 per cent (434 patients) and 98·6 per cent (210 patients) (P = 1·000). The corresponding accuracy for differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis was 90·3 and 87·6 per cent in all patients, and 89·8 and 88·4 per cent respectively among those with a BMI below 30 kg/m2 (P = 0·663). The median radiation dose in the whole low- and standard-dose CT groups was 3 and 7 mSv respectively. In the group with BMI below 30 kg/m2, corresponding median doses were 3 and 5 mSv (P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Low- and standard-dose CT were accurate both in identifying appendicitis and in differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. Low-dose CT was associated with a significant radiation dose reduction, suggesting that it should be standard clinical practice at least in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2.

Visual MRI T-category versus VI-RADS evaluation from multiparametric MRI in the detection of muscle-invasion in patients with suspected bladder cancer: single centre registered clinical trial (MIB-trial).

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) has been proposed to add value in the diagnostic pathway of bladder cancer (BC). We wanted to evaluate the performance of mpMRI for muscle-invasion detection in BC patients using a subjective MRI visual T-category and the Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) score. METHODS: This single centre clinical trial included 45 patients with suspected BC (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02662166). All patients had mpMRI prior to transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TUR-BT). The imaging was correlated to histopathological findings. Two individual radiologists evaluated all the mpMRI images. A binary cut-off point for the detection of muscle-invasion in the MRI visual T-category was defined between T1 and T2 and the VI-RADS cut-off score was 3. Cohen's Kappa values were used to evaluate the agreement between the two radiologists. Sensitivity, Specificity, Area Under Receiver Operator Characteristics Curve (AUC), Positive Predictive Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) were calculated to evaluate the performance of both radiologists separately. RESULTS: AUC values for reader A and B using the MRI visual T-category were 0.76 and 0.56, while the corresponding values for VI-RADS were 0.63 and 0.57, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the radiologists nor the reporting systems (p > .05) in the detection of muscle-invasion. The inter-reader agreement was substantial (0.61-0.80). CONCLUSION: Both the subjective MRI visual T-category and VI-RADS score had only a low to moderate accuracy for the detection of muscle-invasion in BC with no statistically significant difference between the reporting systems.

Effect of Oral Moxifloxacin vs Intravenous Ertapenem Plus Oral Levofloxacin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The APPAC II Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Antibiotics are an effective and safe alternative to appendectomy for managing uncomplicated acute appendicitis, but the optimal antibiotic regimen is not known. Objective: To compare oral antibiotics with combined intravenous followed by oral antibiotics in the management of computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) II multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2017 until November 2018 in 9 Finnish hospitals. A total of 599 patients aged 18 to 60 years with computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis were enrolled in the trial. The last date of follow-up was November 29, 2019. Interventions: Patients randomized to receive oral monotherapy (n = 295) received oral moxifloxacin (400 mg/d) for 7 days. Patients randomized to receive intravenous antibiotics followed by oral antibiotics (n = 288) received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 2 days followed by oral levofloxacin (500 mg/d) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times/d) for 5 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was treatment success (≥65%) for both groups, defined as discharge from hospital without surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during 1-year follow-up, and to determine whether oral antibiotics alone were noninferior to intravenous and oral antibiotics, with a margin of 6% for difference. Results: Among 599 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 36 [12] years; 263 [44%] women), 581 (99.7%) were available for the 1-year follow-up. The treatment success rate at 1 year was 70.2% (1-sided 95% CI, 65.8% to ∞) for patients treated with oral antibiotics and 73.8% (1-sided 95% CI, 69.5% to ∞) for patients treated with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics. The difference was -3.6% ([1-sided 95% CI, -9.7% to ∞]; P = .26 for noninferiority), with the confidence limit exceeding the noninferiority margin. Conclusion and Relevance: Among adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, treatment with 7 days of oral moxifloxacin compared with 2 days of intravenous ertapenem followed by 5 days of levofloxacin and metronidazole resulted in treatment success rates greater than 65% in both groups, but failed to demonstrate noninferiority for treatment success of oral antibiotics compared with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03236961; EudraCT Identifier: 2015-003633-10.

The Accuracy of Low-dose Computed Tomography Protocol in Patients With Suspected Acute Appendicitis: The OPTICAP Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced low-dose computed tomography (CT) accomplished in the OPTICAP trial phantom phase to standard CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. BACKGROUND: Increasing use of CT as the gold standard in diagnosing acute appendicitis has raised concerns regarding radiation exposure. Unenhanced low-dose CT protocols have shown similar diagnostic accuracy with standard CT for diagnosing appendicitis. To our knowledge, there are no other trials in which the same patient with suspected acute appendicitis underwent both standard and low-dose CT allowing interpatient comparison. METHODS: OPTICAP is an interpatient protocol sequence randomized noninferiority single-center trial performed at Turku University Hospital between November, 2015 and August, 2016. Sixty patients with suspected acute appendicitis and body mass index <30 kg/m were enrolled to undergo both standard and low-dose contrast enhanced CT scans, which were categorized as normal, uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis by 2 radiologists in blinded manner. All patients with CT confirmed appendicitis underwent appendectomy to obtain histopathology. RESULTS: The low-dose protocol was not inferior to standard protocol in terms of diagnostic accuracy; 79% [95% confidence interval (CI) 66%-89%) accurate diagnosis in low-dose and 80% (95% CI 67%-90%) in standard CT by primary radiologist. Accuracy to categorize appendicitis severity was 79% for both protocols. The mean radiation dose of low-dose CT was significantly lower compared with standard CT (3.33 and 4.44 mSv, respectively). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced low-dose CT was not inferior to standard CT in diagnosing acute appendicitis or distinguishing between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis in patients with a high likelihood of acute appendicitis. Low-dose CT enabled significant radiation dose reduction.