Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergency general surgical conditions worldwide. Uncomplicated/simple appendicitis can be treated with appendectomy or antibiotics. Some studies have suggested possible benefits with antibiotics with reduced complications, length of hospital stay, and the number of days off work. However, surgery may improve success of treatment as antibiotic treatment is associated with recurrence and future need for surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated/simple acute appendicitis compared with appendectomy for resolution of symptoms and complications. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov) on 19 July 2022. We also searched for unpublished studies in conference proceedings together with reference checking and citation search. There were no restrictions on date, publication status, or language of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. We included studies where most participants were adults with uncomplicated/simple appendicitis. Interventions included antibiotics (by any route) compared with appendectomy (open or laparoscopic). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Primary outcomes included mortality and success of treatment, and secondary outcomes included number of participants requiring appendectomy in the antibiotic group, complications, pain, length of hospital stay, sick leave, malignancy in the antibiotic group, negative appendectomy rate, and quality of life. Success of treatment definitions were heterogeneous although mainly based on resolution of symptoms rather than incorporation of long-term recurrence or need for surgery in the antibiotic group. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies in the review covering 1675 participants randomised to antibiotics and 1683 participants randomised to appendectomy. One study was unpublished. All were conducted in secondary care and two studies received pharmaceutical funding. All studies used broad-spectrum antibiotic regimens expected to cover gastrointestinal bacteria. Most studies used predominantly laparoscopic surgery, but some included mainly open procedures. Six studies included adults and children. Almost all studies aimed to exclude participants with complicated appendicitis prior to randomisation, although one study included 12% with perforation. The diagnostic technique was clinical assessment and imaging in most studies. Only one study limited inclusion by sex (male only). Follow-up ranged from hospital admission only to seven years. Certainty of evidence was mainly affected by risk of bias (due to lack of blinding and loss to follow-up) and imprecision. Primary outcomes It is uncertain whether there was any difference in mortality due to the very low-certainty evidence (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 4.95; 1 study, 492 participants). There may be 76 more people per 1000 having unsuccessful treatment in the antibiotic group compared with surgery, which did not reach our predefined level for clinical significance (risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.96; I2 = 69%; 7 studies, 2471 participants; low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes At one year, 30.7% (95% CI 24.0 to 37.8; I2 = 80%; 9 studies, 1396 participants) of participants in the antibiotic group required appendectomy or, alternatively, more than two-thirds of antibiotic-treated participants avoided surgery in the first year, but the evidence is very uncertain. Regarding complications, it is uncertain whether there is any difference in episodes of Clostridium difficile diarrhoea due to very low-certainty evidence (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.24 to 3.89; 1 study, 1332 participants). There may be a clinically significant reduction in wound infections with antibiotics (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.68; I2 = 16%; 9 studies, 2606 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether antibiotics affect the incidence of intra-abdominal abscess or collection (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.07; I2 = 19%; 6 studies, 1831 participants), or reoperation (Peto OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.16; 1 study, 492 participants) due to very low-certainty evidence, mainly due to rare events causing imprecision and risk of bias. It is uncertain if antibiotics prolonged length of hospital stay by half a day due to the very low-certainty evidence (MD 0.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.01; I2 = 97%; 11 studies, 3192 participants). The incidence of malignancy was 0.3% (95% CI 0 to 1.5; 5 studies, 403 participants) in the antibiotic group although follow-up was variable. Antibiotics probably increased the number of negative appendectomies at surgery (RR 3.16, 95% CI 1.54 to 6.49; I2 = 17%; 5 studies, 707 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotics may be associated with higher rates of unsuccessful treatment for 76 per 1000 people, although differences may not be clinically significant. It is uncertain if antibiotics increase length of hospital stay by half a day. Antibiotics may reduce wound infections. A third of the participants initially treated with antibiotics required subsequent appendectomy or two-thirds avoided surgery within one year, but the evidence is very uncertain. There were too few data from the included studies to comment on major complications.

Research priorities in emergency general surgery (EGS): a modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients account for more than one-third of admissions to hospitals in the National Health Service (NHS) in England. The associated mortality of these patients has been quoted as approximately eight times higher than that of elective surgical admissions. This study used a modified Delphi approach to identify research priorities in EGS. The aim was to establish a research agenda using a formal consensus-based approach in an effort to identify questions relevant to EGS that could ultimately guide research to improve outcomes for this cohort. METHODS: Three rounds were conducted using an electronic questionnaire and involved health care professionals, research personnel, patients and their relatives. In the first round, stakeholders were invited to submit clinical research questions that they felt were priorities for future research. In rounds two and three, participants were asked to score individual questions in order of priority using a 5-point Likert scale. Between rounds, an expert panel analysed results before forwarding questions to subsequent rounds. RESULTS: Ninety-two EGS research questions were proposed in Phase 1. Following the first round of prioritisation, forty-seven questions progressed to the final phase. A final list of seventeen research questions were identified from the final round of prioritisation, categorised as condition-specific questions of high interest within general EGS, emergency colorectal surgery, non-technical and health services research. A broad range of research questions were identified including questions on peri-operative strategies, EGS outcomes in older patients, as well as non-technical and technical influences on EGS outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a consensus delivered framework that should determine the research agenda for future EGS projects. It may also assist setting priorities for research funding and multi-centre collaborative strategies within the academic clinical interest of EGS.

The false dichotomy of surgical futility in the emergency laparotomy setting: scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Futile is defined as 'the fact of having no effect or of achieving nothing'. Futility in medicine has been defined through seven guiding principles, which in the context of emergency surgery, have been relatively unexplored. This scoping review aimed to identify key concepts around surgical futility as it relates to emergency laparotomy. METHODS: Using the Arksey and O'Malley framework, a scoping review was conducted. A search of the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and Embase was performed up until 1 November 2021 to identify literature relevant to the topic of futility in emergency laparotomy. RESULTS: Three cohort studies were included in the analysis. A total of 105 157 patients were included, with 1114 patients reported as futile. All studies were recent (2019 to 2020) and focused on the principle of quantitative futility (assessment of the probability of death after surgery) within a timeline after surgery: two defining futility as death within 48 hours of surgery and one as death within 72 hours. In all cases this was derived from a survival histogram. Predictors of defined futile procedures included age, level of independence prior to admission, surgical pathology, serum creatinine, arterial lactate, and pH. CONCLUSION: There remains a paucity of research defining, exploring, and analysing futile surgery in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. With limited published work focusing on quantitative futility and the binary outcome of death, research is urgently needed to explore all principles of futility, including the wishes of patients and their families.

Small bowel obstruction secondary to intramesosigmoid hernia.

Intramesosigmoid hernias are a rare cause of small bowel obstruction. Here, we present such a case with learning points derived from diagnostic dilemma, shared decision making in consent and the management of a rare cause of a common surgical emergency.

Evaluation of teaching methods for students on hernias: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Teaching may be delivered through different media in different settings. We aimed to evaluate four teaching modalities for medical students on a common surgical topic. We compared learning, student preferences and experiences as outcome measures. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of all medical students undertaking their first attachment in surgery. Students were randomly allocated into four groups: lecture, handout, website and patient-based tutorial, all on the management of an inguinal hernia. Baseline knowledge was assessed prior to group allocations through a questionnaire. Students completed a 24-h post-intervention questionnaire and satisfaction survey. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four students participated. There was no difference in the pre-intervention knowledge scores between the groups. The post-intervention knowledge scores significantly improved in the lecture and website groups. However, the website was significantly less engaging and clinically relevant form of teaching compared with the lecture. Despite being engaging and relevant, the tutorial group failed to improve knowledge scores. The handout did not improve knowledge scores, nor was it considered engaging or relevant. CONCLUSION: Knowledge scores significantly improved with the lecture and website teaching methods. The lecture was more engaging, clinically relevant and instilled confidence. Students preferred the website/podcasts as additional information to facilitate their learning and increased their knowledge equivalent or superior to other standard media. However, despite being effective, the student experience was less positive than for non-reusable contact teaching. If student satisfaction is to be a factor in achievement of learning outcomes, a balance has to be struck between different media delivery.

Endometriosis presenting as an acute groin swelling: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Many conditions present as groin swellings, in both the elective and emergency setting. The management of these conditions varies widely, thus a prompt and accurate diagnosis is important. CASE PRESENTATION: A 27 year old female presented with an acute painful swelling in her right groin. A preliminary diagnosis of an incarcerated femoral hernia led to urgent surgical exploration. Histology of the excised tissue showed appearances consistent with endometriosis. CONCLUSION: Endometriosis is an unusual cause of an acute groin mass, which should be considered as a differential diagnosis in women of childbearing age.

Swallowed dental bridge causing ileal perforation: a case report.

We report the case of a 53 year old gentleman who had accidentally swallowed his dental bridge. One week following this he experienced a sudden onset of generalised abdominal pain and underwent laparotomy. At operation he was found to have a distal ileal perforation and an ileocaecal resection was performed. Although most swallowed foreign bodies pass through the gastrointestinal tract without problem, serious complications including intestinal perforation can occur.

Osseous metaplasia in an ulcerating tubular adenoma of the colon: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Heterotopic bone is rarely found in the gastrointestinal tract. Here we report a rare case of metaplastic ossification within a benign ulcerating adenoma and review the literature concerning the aetiology. CASE PRESENTATION: A 63-year-old woman, who presented with a history of melaena, was found at colonoscopy to have a pedunculated ulcerating polyp. Histological examination demonstrated multiple areas of osseous metaplasia within the polyp stroma. CONCLUSION: Heterotopic ossification in colonic adenomas is a particularly rare phenomenon, with the majority of cases occurring within malignant lesions. The suggested mechanisms for its aetiology still remain unclear.

Large bowel obstruction due to sesame seed bezoar: a case report.

We report a case of a 79 year old man with a known benign anastomotic stricture presenting with large bowel obstruction. At laparotomy the obstruction was found to be caused by a large sesame seed bezoar. Seed bezoars are well known to cause impaction in the rectum but have never been previously reported to cause large bowel obstruction. We recommend that patients with known large bowel strictures should be advised not to eat seeds as this could ultimately lead to obstruction, ischaemia or perforation.