Two Days Versus Five Days of Postoperative Antibiotics for Complex Appendicitis: Cost Analysis of a Randomized, Noninferiority Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare costs for 2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics within the antibiotics after an aPPendectomy In Complex appendicitis trial.Background:Recent studies suggest that restrictive antibiotic use leads to a significant reduction in hospital stays without compromising patient safety. Its potential effect on societal costs remains underexplored. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, open-label, multicenter clinical trial powered for noninferiority. Patients with complex appendicitis (age ≥ 8 years) were randomly allocated to 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendectomy. Patient inclusion lasted from June 2017 to June 2021 in 15 Dutch hospitals. The final follow-up was on September 1, 2021. The primary trial endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. In the present study, the main outcome measures were overall societal costs (comprising direct health care costs and costs related to productivity loss) and cost-effectiveness. Direct health care costs were recorded based on data in the electronic patient files, complemented by a telephone follow-up at 90 days. In addition, data on loss of productivity were acquired through the validated Productivity Cost Questionnaire at 4 weeks after surgery. Cost estimates were based on prices for the year 2019. RESULTS: In total, 1005 patients were evaluated in the "intention-to-treat" analysis: 502 patients were allocated to the 2-day group and 503 to the 5-day group. The mean difference in overall societal costs was - €625 (95% CI: -€ 958 to -€ 278) to the advantage of the 2-day group. This difference was largely explained by reduced hospital stay. Productivity losses were similar between the study groups. Restricting postoperative antibiotics to 2 days was cost-effective, with estimated cost savings of €31,117 per additional infectious complication. CONCLUSIONS: Two days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis results in a statistically significant and relevant cost reduction, as compared with 5 days. Findings apply to laparoscopic appendectomy in a well-resourced health care setting.

Nationwide standardization of minimally invasive right hemicolectomy for colon cancer and development and validation of a video-based competency assessment tool (the Right study).

BACKGROUND: Substantial variation exists when performing a minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (MIRH) due to disparities in training, expertise and differences in implementation of innovations. This study aimed to achieve national consensus on an optimal and standardized MIRH technique for colon cancer and to develop and validate a video-based competency assessment tool (CAT) for MIRH. METHOD: Statements covering all elements of MIRH were formulated. Subsequently, the Delphi technique was used to reach consensus on a standardized MIRH among 76 colorectal surgeons from 43 different centres. A CAT was developed based on the Delphi results. Nine surgeons assessed the same 12 unedited full-length videos using the CAT, allowing evaluation of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: After three Delphi rounds, consensus (≥80% agreement) was achieved on 23 of the 24 statements. Consensus statements included the use of low intra-abdominal pressure, detailed anatomical outline how to perform complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation, the creation of an intracorporeal anastomosis, and specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel incision using a wound protector. The CAT included seven consecutive steps to measure competency of the MIRH and showed high consistency among surgeons with an overall ICC of 0.923. CONCLUSION: Nationwide consensus on a standardized and optimized technique of MIRH was reached. The CAT developed showed excellent interrater reliability. These achievements are crucial steps to an ongoing nationwide quality improvement project (the Right study).

Best Evidence for Each Surgical Step in Minimally Invasive Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review.

Objective: The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature for each surgical step of the minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (MIRH) for non-locally advanced colon cancer, to define the most optimal procedure with the highest level of evidence. Background: High variability exists in the way MIRH is performed between surgeons and hospitals, which could affect patients' postoperative and oncological outcomes. Methods: A systematic search using PubMed was performed to first identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and if there were none then landmark papers and consensus statements were systematically searched for each key step of MIRH. Systematic reviews were assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and selection was based on highest quality followed by year of publication. Results: Low (less than 12 mmHg) intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) gives higher mean quality of recovery compared to standard IAP. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is associated with lowest recurrence and highest 5-year overall survival rates, without worsening short-term outcomes. Routine D3 versus D2 lymphadenectomy showed higher LN yield, but more vascular injuries, and no difference in overall and disease-free survival. Intracorporeal anastomosis is associated with better intra- and postoperative outcomes. The Pfannenstiel incision gives the lowest chance of incisional hernias compared to all other extraction sites. Conclusion: According to the best available evidence, the most optimal MIRH for colon cancer without clinically involved D3 nodes entails at least low IAP, CME with D2 lymphadenectomy, an intracorporeal anastomosis and specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel incision.

National implementation of an optimal standardised technique for right-sided colon cancer: protocol of an interventional sequential cohort study (Right study).

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (MIRH) is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with right-sided colon cancer. This operation has evolved during recent decades, with many innovations and improvements but this has also resulted in high variability of uptake with subsequent substantial variableness. The aim of this ongoing study is to identify current surgical variations, determine the most optimal and standardised MIRH and nationally train and implement that technique to improve short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes. METHODS: The Right study is a national multicentre prospective interventional sequential cohort study. Firstly, current local practice was evaluated. Subsequently, a standardised surgical technique for right-sided colon cancer was determined using the Delphi consensus method, and this procedure was trained during hands-on courses. The standardised MIRH will be implemented with proctoring (implementation cohort), after which the performance will be monitored (consolidation cohort). Patients who will receive a minimally invasive (extended) right hemicolectomy for cT1-3N0-2M0 colon cancer will be included. The primary outcome is patient safety reflected in the 90-day overall complication rate according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Secondary outcomes will include intraoperative complications, 90-day mortality rate, number of resected tumour-positive lymph nodes, completeness of mesocolic excision, surgical quality score, locoregional and distant recurrence and 5-year overall survival. A total number of 1095 patients (365 per cohort) will be included. DISCUSSION: The Right study is designed to safely implement the best surgical practice concerning patients with right-sided colon cancer aiming to standardise and improve the surgical quality of MIRH at a national level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04889456, May 2021.

Video-based tools for surgical quality assessment of technical skills in laparoscopic procedures: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Quality of surgery has substantial impact on both short- and long-term clinical outcomes. This stresses the need for objective surgical quality assessment (SQA) for education, clinical practice and research purposes. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive overview of all video-based objective SQA tools in laparoscopic procedures and their validity to objectively assess surgical performance. METHODS: PubMed, Embase.com and Web of Science were systematically searched by two reviewers to identify all studies focusing on video-based SQA tools of technical skills in laparoscopic surgery performed in a clinical setting. Evidence on validity was evaluated using a modified validation scoring system. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies with a total of 41 video-based SQA tools were identified. These tools were used in 9 different fields of laparoscopic surgery and were divided into 4 categories: the global assessment scale (GAS), the error-based assessment scale (EBAS), the procedure-specific assessment tool (PSAT) and artificial intelligence (AI). The number of studies focusing on these four categories were 21, 6, 31 and 3, respectively. Twelve studies validated the SQA tool with clinical outcomes. In 11 of those studies, a positive association between surgical quality and clinical outcomes was found. CONCLUSION: This systematic review included a total of 41 unique video-based SQA tools to assess surgical technical skills in various domains of laparoscopic surgery. This study suggests that validated SQA tools enable objective assessment of surgical performance with relevance for clinical outcomes, which can be used for training, research and quality improvement programs.

2 days versus 5 days of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis: a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate duration of postoperative antibiotics for complex appendicitis is unclear. The increasing global threat of antimicrobial resistance warrants restrictive antibiotic use, which could also reduce side-effects, length of hospital stay, and costs. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority trial in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, patients with complex appendicitis (aged ≥8 years) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 2 days or 5 days of intravenous antibiotics after appendicectomy. Randomisation was stratified by centre, and treating physicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days. The main outcome was the absolute risk difference (95% CI) in the primary endpoint, adjusted for age and severity of appendicitis, with a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. Outcome assessment was based on electronic patient records and a telephone consultation 90 days after appendicectomy. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. Safety outcomes were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NL5946. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2017, and June 3, 2021, 13 267 patients were screened and 1066 were randomly assigned, 533 to each group. 31 were excluded from intention-to-treat analysis of the 2-day group and 30 from the 5-day group owing to errors in recruitment or consent. Appendicectomy was done laparoscopically in 955 (95%) of 1005 patients. The telephone follow-up was completed in 664 (66%) of 1005 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 51 (10%) of 502 patients analysed in the 2-day group and 41 (8%) of 503 patients analysed in the 5-day group (adjusted absolute risk difference 2·0%, 95% CI -1·6 to 5·6). Rates of complications and re-interventions were similar between trial groups. Fewer patients had adverse effects of antibiotics in the 2-day group (45 [9%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (112 [22%] of 503 patients; odds ratio [OR] 0·344, 95% CI 0·237 to 0·498). Re-admission to hospital was more frequent in the 2-day group (58 [12%] of 502 patients) than in the 5-day group (29 [6%] of 503 patients; OR 2·135, 1·342 to 3·396). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: 2 days of postoperative intravenous antibiotics for complex appendicitis is non-inferior to 5 days in terms of infectious complications and mortality within 90 days, based on a non-inferiority margin of 7·5%. These findings apply to laparoscopic appendicectomy conducted in a well resourced health-care setting. Adopting this strategy will reduce adverse effects of antibiotics and length of hospital stay. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Postoperative Antibiotics and Time to Reach Discharge Criteria after Appendectomy for Complex Appendicitis.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative antibiotic treatment is indicated for 3-5 days following appendectomy for complex appendicitis. However, meeting discharge criteria may allow for safe discontinuation of antibiotics and discharge. This study assessed the association between time to reach discharge criteria and duration of postoperative antibiotic use and length of stay. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study including patients who underwent appendectomy for complex appendicitis and received postoperative antibiotics for >24 h. Main outcome measures were time to reach discharge criteria, duration of postoperative antibiotic use, length of hospital stay, and postoperative infectious complications. Discharge criteria were defined as absence of fever (temperature ≤38°C) for 24 h, ability to tolerate oral intake, and pain controlled by oral analgesics. RESULTS: Between May 2014 and January 2015, 124 patients were included. Time to reach discharge criteria was 2 days (interquartile range [IQR] 1-3). Patients received postoperative antibiotics and were in hospital for a median of 5 (IQR 3-5) and 5 (IQR 4-6) days, respectively. Infectious complications occurred in 12% and did not differ between patients reaching discharge criteria before or after 2 postoperative days. DISCUSSION: Discharge criteria were met by a median of 2 days after appendectomy for complex appendicitis. This suggests that postoperative antibiotics duration and thereby hospital stay can be reduced. In daily practice, prescribed antibiotics are not reduced in total days given. Prospective studies that evaluate limited postoperative antibiotic use, based on these criteria, are necessary.

Multicenter cohort study on the presentation and treatment of acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Current studies have demonstrated conflicting results regarding surgical care for acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess trends in diagnosis as well as treatment of acute appendicitis in the Netherlands during the first and second COVID-19 infection wave. METHODS: All consecutive patients that had an appendectomy for acute appendicitis in nine hospitals from January 2019 to December 2020 were included. The primary outcome was the number of appendectomies for acute appendicitis. Secondary outcomes included time between onset of symptoms and hospital admission, proportion of complex appendicitis, postoperative length of stay and postoperative infectious complications. Outcomes were compared between the pre-COVID group and COVID group. RESULTS: A total of 4401 patients were included. The mean weekly rate of appendectomies during the COVID period was 44.0, compared to 40.9 in the pre-COVID period. The proportion of patients with complex appendicitis and mean postoperative length of stay in days were similar in the pre-COVID and COVID group (respectively 35.5% vs 36.8%, p = 0.36 and 2.0 ± 2.2 vs 2.0 ± 2.6, p = 0.93). There were no differences in postoperative infectious complications. A computed tomography scan was used more frequently as a diagnostic tool after the onset of COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID (13.8% vs 9.8%, p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: No differences were observed in number of appendectomies, proportion of complex appendicitis, postoperative length of stay or postoperative infectious complications before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A CT scan was used more frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction after caesarean section; Ogilvie's syndrome]. / Bolle buik na sectio caesarea.

BACKGROUND: Acute pseudo-obstruction of the colon - also known as Ogilvie's syndrome - is a rare clinical presentation in obstetrics. The syndrome is seen more often following caesarean section than vaginal delivery. CASE DESCRIPTION: We present a 38-year-old primigravida who developed Ogilvie's syndrome following secondary caesarean section. Despite conservative management, due to a caecal dilation of over 12 centimetres and impending perforation of the caecum, a hemicolectomy was necessary. CONCLUSION: Ogilvie's syndrome is potentially life-threatening, certainly if perforation of the bowel occurs. Prompt diagnosis and treatment are essential to prevent severe morbidity.

[A late complication of cholecystitis]. / Een late complicatie van cholecystitis.

A 75-year-old man developed a cholecystocutaneous fistula after conservative treatment for cholecystitis. Six months later, clinical and radiological examination revealed an abscess at the site of the fistula. Upon incision there was minimal pus, but a large gallstone was extracted.

Two versus five days of antibiotics after appendectomy for complex acute appendicitis (APPIC): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common indications for emergency surgery. In patients with a complex appendicitis, prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended after appendectomy. There is no consensus regarding the optimum duration of antibiotics. Guidelines propose 3 to 7 days of treatment, but shorter courses may be as effective in the prevention of infectious complications. At the same time, the global issue of increasing antimicrobial resistance urges for optimization of antibiotic strategies. The aim of this study is to determine whether a short course (48 h) of postoperative antibiotics is non-inferior to current standard practice of 5 days. METHODS: Patients of 8 years and older undergoing appendectomy for acute complex appendicitis - defined as a gangrenous and/or perforated appendicitis or appendicitis in presence of an abscess - are eligible for inclusion. Immunocompromised or pregnant patients are excluded, as well as patients with a contraindication to the study antibiotics. In total, 1066 patients will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the experimental treatment arm (48 h of postoperative intravenously administered (IV) antibiotics) or the control arm (5 days of postoperative IV antibiotics). After discharge from the hospital, patients participate in a productivity-cost-questionnaire at 4 weeks and a standardized telephone follow-up at 90 days after appendectomy. The primary outcome is a composite endpoint of infectious complications, including intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) and surgical site infection (SSI), and mortality within 90 days after appendectomy. Secondary outcomes include IAA, SSI, restart of antibiotics, length of hospital stay (LOS), reoperation, percutaneous drainage, readmission rate, and cost-effectiveness. The non-inferiority margin for the difference in the primary endpoint rate is set at 7.5% (one-sided test at ɑ 0.025). Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be performed. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence on whether 48 h of postoperative antibiotics is non-inferior to a standard course of 5 days of antibiotics. If non-inferiority is established, longer intravenous administration following appendectomy for complex appendicitis can be abandoned, and guidelines need to be adjusted accordingly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register, NTR6128 . Registered on 20 December 2016.

Surgery versus conservative management for recurrent and ongoing left-sided diverticulitis (DIRECT trial): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or persisting complaints after an episode of left-sided diverticulitis are managed with either conservative measures or elective sigmoidectomy. To date, there are no data from randomised trials. We aimed to establish which treatment leads to a better quality of life for patients with diverticulitis. METHODS: We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (DIRECT trial) in 24 teaching and two academic hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18-75 years presenting with either recurrent (three or more presentations with clinical signs of acute diverticulitis within 2 years) or persistent abdominal complaints (ongoing lower left abdominal pain or persistent change in bowel habits for ≥3 months) after an episode of left-sided diverticulitis, confirmed by CT, ultrasound, or endoscopy, were included. Patients were excluded if they had previous elective or emergency surgery for acute sigmoid diverticulitis, an absolute operation indication, suspicion of a colorectal malignancy, with a preoperative or postoperative risk greater than III (on the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification), or were unable to complete questionnaire or follow-up. Patients were randomly assigned (3:3) to receive conservative management or elective (laparoscopic) sigmoidectomy using a digital randomisation system, stratified by type of disease and centre, with a block size of six. Patients, physicians, and researchers were not masked to treatment allocation. Our primary endpoint was health-related quality of life, measured by the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) at 6 months after inclusion or surgery, depending on randomisation group. This trial is registered with trialregister.nl, number NTR1478, and is closed for inclusion. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2010, and April 1, 2014, we randomly assigned 109 patients to receive surgical treatment (resection; n=53) or conservative management (n=56), after which the Data Safety and Monitoring Board prematurely terminated the trial because of increasing difficulties in recruitment. 47 (89%) of 53 patients received surgical treatment and 43 (77%) of 56 patients received conservative management. The GIQLI score at 6 months' follow-up was significantly higher in patients randomly assigned to receive surgical treatment (mean 114·4 [SD 22·3]) than conservative management (100·4 [22·7]; mean difference 14·2, 95% CI 7·2-21·1, p<0·0001). 43 (38%) of 109 patients had a severe adverse event in the first 6 months after treatment (18 [34%] of 53 patients in the surgical treatment group vs 23 [40%] of 57 patients in the conservative treatment group). Seven (15%) patients who received surgical treatment developed anastomotic leakage. Of the 56 patients assigned to be treated conservatively, 13 (23%) ultimately underwent elective resection due to ongoing abdominal complaints, with no anastomotic leakage. We recorded no patient deaths. INTERPRETATION: Elective sigmoidectomy, despite its inherent risk of complications, results in better quality of life than conservative management in patients with recurrent and persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Accuracy of White Blood Cell Count and C-reactive Protein Levels Related to Duration of Symptoms in Patients Suspected of Acute Appendicitis.

OBJECTIVES: Low levels of white blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) have been suggested to sufficiently rule out acute appendicitis. The diagnostic value of these tests is likely to depend on the duration of complaints. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of these inflammatory markers in relation to duration of symptoms in patients suspected of acute appendicitis. METHODS: Patients suspected of having acute appendicitis were retrospectively selected from five prospective cohorts of patients with acute abdominal pain presenting at the emergency department (ED) in two European countries. Only adult patients with clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis based on medical history, physical examination, and laboratory studies at the time of registration in the original cohorts were included in this analysis. WBC count and CRP level were determined in all patients and a final diagnosis was assigned to every patient by an expert panel based on all available clinical data and follow-up. For categories based on symptom duration, the diagnostic accuracy of single and combined cutoff values was determined, and negative predictive values (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) were calculated. Subgroup analyses for age (<40 years or ≥40 years) and sex were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1,024 patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis were included, of whom 580 (57%) were assigned a final diagnosis of appendicitis. No value of WBC count, CRP level, or their combination resulted in a NPV of more than 90%, regardless of the duration of symptoms. A WBC count of >20 × 10(9) /L in combination with symptoms for more than 48 hours was associated with a PPV of 100%. However, only eight of the 1,024 patients (1%) fulfilled these criteria, limiting the clinical applicability. No other cutoff level of WBC count, CRP level, or their combination resulted in a PPV of more than 80%, regardless of the duration of symptoms. In female patients, normal levels of CRP and WBC count more accurately excluded the diagnosis of appendicitis than normal levels did in male patients. CONCLUSIONS: No WBC count or CRP level can safely and sufficiently confirm or exclude the suspected diagnosis of acute appendicitis in patients who present with abdominal pain of 5 days or less in duration.

C-reactive protein and white blood cell count as triage test between urgent and nonurgent conditions in 2961 patients with acute abdominal pain.

The purpose of this article is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count to discriminate between urgent and nonurgent conditions in patients with acute abdominal pain at the emergency department, thereby guiding the selection of patients for immediate diagnostic imaging.Data from 3 large published prospective cohort studies of patients with acute abdominal pain were combined in an individual patient data meta-analysis. CRP levels and WBC counts were compared between patients with urgent and nonurgent final diagnoses. Parameters of diagnostic accuracy were calculated for clinically applicable cutoff values of CRP levels and WBC count, and for combinations.A total of 2961 patients were included of which 1352 patients (45.6%) had an urgent final diagnosis. The median WBC count and CRP levels were significantly higher in the urgent group than in the nonurgent group (12.8 ×10/L; interquartile range [IQR] 9.9-16) versus (9.3 ×10/L; IQR 7.2-12.1) and (46  mg/L; IQR 12-100 versus 10  mg/L; IQR 7-26) (P < 0.001).The highest positive predictive value (PPV) (85.5%) and lowest false positives (14.5%) were reached when cutoff values of CRP level >50  mg/L and WBC count >15 ×10/L were combined; however, 85.3% of urgent cases was missed.A high CRP level (>50  mg/L) combined with a high WBC count (>15 ×10/L) leads to the highest PPV. However, this applies only to a small subgroup of patients (8.7%). Overall, CRP levels and WBC count are insufficient markers to be used as a triage test in the selection for diagnostic imaging, even with a longer duration of complaints (>48  hours).

Routine ultrasound and limited computed tomography for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis continues to be a challenging diagnosis. Preoperative radiological imaging using ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT) has gained popularity as it may offer a more accurate diagnosis than classic clinical evaluation. The optimal implementation of these diagnostic modalities has yet to be established. The aim of the present study was to investigate a diagnostic pathway that uses routine US, limited CT, and clinical re-evaluation for patients with acute appendicitis. METHODS: A prospective analysis was performed of all patients presenting with acute abdominal pain at the emergency department from June 2005 until July 2006 using a structured diagnosis and management flowchart. Daily practice was mimicked, while ensuring a valid assessment of clinical and radiological diagnostic accuracies and the effect they had on patient management. RESULTS: A total of 802 patients were included in this analysis. Additional radiological imaging was performed in 96.3% of patients with suspected appendicitis (n = 164). Use of CT was kept to a minimum (17.9%), with a US:CT ratio of approximately 6:1. Positive and negative predictive values for the clinical diagnosis of appendicitis were 63 and 98%, respectively; for US 94 and 97%, respectively; and for CT 100 and 100%, respectively. The negative appendicitis rate was 3.3%, the perforation rate was 23.5%, and the missed perforated appendicitis rate was 3.4%. No (diagnostic) laparoscopies were performed. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnostic pathway using routine US, limited CT, and clinical re-evaluation for patients with acute abdominal pain can provide excellent results for the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis.

Standard outpatient re-evaluation for patients not admitted to the hospital after emergency department evaluation for acute abdominal pain.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of standard outpatient re-evaluation for patients who are not admitted to the hospital after emergency department surgical consultation for acute abdominal pain. METHODS: All patients seen at the emergency department between June 2005 and July 2006 for acute abdominal pain were included in a prospective study using a structured diagnosis and management flowchart. Patients not admitted to the hospital were given appointments for re-evaluation at the outpatient clinic within 24 h. All clinical parameters, radiological results, diagnostic considerations, and management proposals were scored prospectively. RESULTS: Five-hundred patients were included in this analysis. For 148 patients (30%), the final diagnosis was different from the diagnosis after initial evaluation. Eighty-five patients (17%) had a change in management after re-evaluation, and 20 of them (4%) were admitted to the hospital for an operation. Only 6 patients (1.2%) had a delay in diagnosis and treatment, which did not cause extra morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Standard outpatient re-evaluation is a safe and effective means of improving diagnostic accuracy and helps to adapt management for patients that are not admitted to the hospital after surgical consultation for acute abdominal pain at the emergency department.

Acute abdominal pain in women at an emergency department: predictors of chronicity.

BACKGROUND: Persistence of pain after acute abdominal pain has been encountered but predictors of chronicity are insufficiently known. AIMS: To assess the course of acute abdominal pain and to explore whether chronicity is predicted by baseline demographic and clinical variables. METHODS: A follow-up study was conducted on all consecutive women who had visited an emergency department of a secondary care teaching hospital for acute abdominal pain. After a mean of 2.3years 115 women (58%) completed questionnaires. RESULTS: At follow-up 34 women (30%) still suffered from abdominal pain complaints for more than 3months the past year. Low education level (Exp(B)=4.21, p=0.017) and having experienced abuse before the age of 16 (Exp(B)=3.14, p=0.016) were significantly and independently associated with chronicity. No other socio-demographic or clinical factors predicted the outcome. CONCLUSION: At a 2.3year follow-up period nearly one third of all women with acute abdominal pain still suffered from pain. Low education level and abuse at younger age showed to be risk factors for pain persistence.

US examination of the appendix in children with suspected appendicitis: the additional value of secondary signs.

This study evaluated the additional value of secondary signs in the diagnosing of appendicitis in children with ultrasound. From May 2005 to June 2006, 212 consecutive paediatric patients with suspected appendicitis were examined. Ultrasonographic depiction of the appendix was classified into four groups: 1, normal appendix; 2, appendix not depicted, no secondary signs of appendicitis; 3, appendix not depicted with one of the following secondary signs: hyperechoic mesenteric fat, fluid collection, local dilated small bowel loop; 4, depiction of inflamed appendix. We classified 96 patients in group 1, 41 in group 2, 13 in group 3, and 62 in group 4. Prevalence of appendicitis was 71/212 (34%). Negative predictive values of groups 1 and 2 were 99% and 100%, respectively. Positive predictive values of groups 3 and 4 were 85% and 95%, respectively. In groups 3 and 4, hyperechoic mesenteric fat was seen in 73/75 (97.3%), fluid collections and dilated bowel loops were seen in 12/75 (16.0%) and 5/75 (6.6%), respectively. This study shows that in case of non-visualization of the appendix without secondary signs, appendicitis can be safely ruled out. Furthermore, secondary signs of appendicitis alone are a strong indicator of acute appendicitis.