Prospective evaluation of the emetogenic profile and analgesic efficacy of intravenous ibuprofen and metamizole in the immediate postoperative period of pediatric acute appendicitis. / Evaluación prospectiva del perfil emético y la eficacia analgésica del ibuprofeno y el metamizol intravenosos en el postoperatorio inmediato de la apendicitis aguda pediátrica.

BACKGROUND: Literature comparing different alternatives for pain control in the immediate postoperative period of pediatric acute appendicitis (PAA) is scarce. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively compared the analgesic and emetogenic profile of intravenous ibuprofen and metamizole in the immediate postoperative period of PAA. For this purpose, we used a sample of patients operated on in 2021 in our center. Participants were recruited on arrival at the Emergency Department and histopathological confirmation of the diagnosis was obtained in all of them. Pain was evaluated every 8 hours after the surgery with validated visual analog scales ranging from 0 to 10 points. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare the evolution of pain in the 48 hours after surgery between the two groups. RESULTS: The sample included 95 patients (65% males) with a mean age of 9.7 years (sd: 3.14). 41 patients were treated with Ibuprofen (group 1) and 54 with metamizole (group 2). No significant differences were found in the level of pain either in the comparisons of point measurements or in its evolution in the 48 hours after surgery (p= 0.58). After adjusting for the received fluid therapy, children in the metamizole group had significantly more emetic episodes and needed significantly more doses of ondansetron. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, ibuprofen had a similar analgesic efficacy and a better emetogenic profile than metamizole in the immediate postoperative period of PAA. Future prospective, adequately controlled studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings.

INTRODUCCION: En la literatura existen pocas referencias que comparen las distintas alternativas disponibles para controlar el dolor en el postoperatorio inmediato de la apendicitis aguda pediátrica (AAP). MATERIAL Y METODOS: Comparación prospectiva del perfil analgésico y emético del ibuprofeno y el metamizol intravenosos en el postoperatorio inmediato de la AAP, para lo cual se recurre a una muestra de pacientes operados en 2021 en nuestro centro. Los participantes fueron reclutados a su llegada a Urgencias, obteniéndose confirmación histopatológica del diagnóstico en todos ellos. La evaluación del dolor se llevó a cabo cada 8 horas tras la cirugía mediante escalas analógicas visuales validadas, con valoraciones entre los 0 y los 10 puntos. Se realizó un ANOVA de las medidas repetidas entre los dos grupos para comparar la evolución del dolor en las 48 horas posteriores a la cirugía. RESULTADOS: La muestra estaba compuesta por un total de 95 pacientes (65% de ellos varones) con una edad media de 9,7 años (DT: 3,14). 41 pacientes fueron tratados con ibuprofeno (grupo 1) y 54 con metamizol (grupo 2). No se hallaron diferencias significativas en lo que respecta al dolor, ni en las comparaciones de las mediciones puntuales, ni en su evolución en las 48 horas posteriores a la cirugía (p= 0,58). Una vez realizado el ajuste correspondiente a la terapia de fluidos recibida, los niños del grupo metamizol tuvieron significativamente más episodios eméticos y necesitaron significativamente más dosis de ondansetrón. CONCLUSIONES: En nuestra cohorte, el ibuprofeno tuvo una eficacia analgésica similar y un mejor perfil emético que el metamizol en el postoperatorio inmediato de la AAP. Se hacen necesarios nuevos estudios prospectivos, adecuadamente controlados y con mayor tamaño muestral que validen estos hallazgos.

Evaluación prospectiva del perfil emético y la eficacia analgésica del ibuprofeno y el metamizol intravenososen el postoperatorio inmediato de la apendicitis agudapediátrica / Prospective evaluation of the emetogenic profile and analgesic efficacy of intravenous ibuprofen and metamizole in the immediate postoperative period of pediatric acute appendicitis

Introducción: En la literatura existen pocas referencias que comparen las distintas alternativas disponibles para controlar el dolor enel postoperatorio inmediato de la apendicitis aguda pediátrica (AAP).Material y métodos: Comparación prospectiva del perfil anal-gésico y emético del ibuprofeno y el metamizol intravenosos en elpostoperatorio inmediato de la AAP, para lo cual se recurre a unamuestra de pacientes operados en 2021 en nuestro centro. Los participantes fueron reclutados a su llegada a Urgencias, obteniéndoseconfirmación histopatológica del diagnóstico en todos ellos. La evaluación del dolor se llevó a cabo cada 8 horas tras la cirugía medianteescalas analógicas visuales validadas, con valoraciones entre los 0 ylos 10 puntos. Se realizó un ANOVA de las medidas repetidas entrelos dos grupos para comparar la evolución del dolor en las 48 horasposteriores a la cirugía.Resultados: La muestra estaba compuesta por un total de 95 pacientes (65% de ellos varones) con una edad media de 9,7 años (DT:3,14). 41 pacientes fueron tratados con ibuprofeno (grupo 1) y 54 conmetamizol (grupo 2). No se hallaron diferencias significativas en lo querespecta al dolor, ni en las comparaciones de las mediciones puntuales,ni en su evolución en las 48 horas posteriores a la cirugía (p= 0,58). Unavez realizado el ajuste correspondiente a la terapia de fluidos recibida,los niños del grupo metamizol tuvieron significativamente más episodioseméticos y necesitaron significativamente más dosis de ondansetrón.Conclusiones: En nuestra cohorte, el ibuprofeno tuvo una eficaciaanalgésica similar y un mejor perfil emético que el metamizol en elpostoperatorio inmediato de la AAP. Se hacen necesarios nuevos estudiosprospectivos, adecuadamente controlados y con mayor tamaño muestralque validen estos hallazgos.(AU)

Background: Literature comparing different alternatives for paincontrol in the immediate postoperative period of pediatric acute appendicitis (PAA) is scarce.Materials and methods: We prospectively compared the analgesicand emetogenic profile of intravenous ibuprofen and metamizole in theimmediate postoperative period of PAA. For this purpose, we used asample of patients operated on in 2021 in our center. Participants wererecruited on arrival at the Emergency Department and histopathologi-cal confirmation of the diagnosis was obtained in all of them. Pain wasevaluated every 8 hours after the surgery with validated visual analogscales ranging from 0 to 10 points. Repeated measures ANOVA wasused to compare the evolution of pain in the 48 hours after surgerybetween the two groups. Results: The sample included 95 patients (65% males) with a meanage of 9.7 years (sd: 3.14). 41 patients were treated with Ibuprofen(group 1) and 54 with metamizole (group 2). No significant differ-ences were found in the level of pain either in the comparisons of pointmeasurements or in its evolution in the 48 hours after surgery (p= 0.58).After adjusting for the received fluid therapy, children in the metamizolegroup had significantly more emetic episodes and needed significantlymore doses of ondansetron. Conclusions: In our cohort, ibuprofen had a similar analgesic ef-ficacy and a better emetogenic profile than metamizole in the immediatepostoperative period of PAA. Future prospective, adequately controlledstudies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings.(AU)

Antibiotic Treatment in Complicated Appendicitis: Can It Be Optimized?

BACKGROUND: The management of complicated appendicitis is inconclusive. Guidelines have not been established for the use of personalized antibiotic treatment. OBJECTIVES: To investigate specific risk factors to consider during the initial first-choice antibiotic therapy in children with complicated appendicitis. METHODS: This study included all pediatric patients younger than 18 years of age who underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy during 2012-2022 at a single tertiary medical center. RESULTS: In total, 300 pediatric patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy due to complicated appendicitis. The patients were treated with ceftriaxone + metronidazole (CM). For 57 (19%) patients, the empirical treatment was changed to tazobactam/piperacillin (TP) due to resistant bacteria or clinical deterioration. The presence of generalized peritonitis during surgery and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels above 20 mg/L at admission were identified as risk factors for changing the antibiotic regimen from CM to TP. CONCLUSIONS: Generalized peritonitis and CRP > 20 gr/L were highly correlated with changing the antibiotic regimen to TP. For such patients, initial treatment with TP may result in clinical improvement and shorter hospitalization.

Appendiceal adenocarcinoma, diagnosed after acute perforated appendicitis: Potential contribution of HIPEC.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of peritoneal metastasis from appendicular adenocarcinoma consists of cyto-reductive surgery (CRS) and Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC). In case of acute appendicular syndrome (AAS) the tumor is likely to be perforated. In that case, there is no treatment recommendation. We propose CRS and HIPEC. MATERIALS AND METHOD: We listed 21 consecutive patients who were addressed for discovery of appendiceal adenocarcinoma. The emergency surgery was performed in a primary-care hospital. We evaluated the therapeutic algorithms, per operative decision, survival and recurrent rate. RESULTS: Among the 21 patients, 4 patients were diagnosed as synchronous appendicular peritoneal metastasis, and underwent CRS and HIPEC. The other 17 patients with diagnosis of adenocarcinoma on anatomopathological samples, without peritoneal metastasis during appendectomy, were addressed. Between them 2 patients were denied CRS. Among the 15 operated patients, 8 patients had no peritoneal metastasis discovery during surgery, and therefore underwent prophylactic CRS and HIPEC. Peritoneal metastasis were discovered for the other 7 patients, who also underwent CRS and HIPEC. For the prophylactic group, the recurrence rate is 12,5 %, overall survival (OS) is 100 %. The rate of grade III-IV surgical complications after CRS and HIPEC was 36 % among the 19 patients who underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: In case of appendectomy in emergency situations for perforated adenocarcinoma, half of the patients may have peritoneal metastasis. In case of non-identified peritoneal metastasis during CRS, performing a prophylactic HIPEC seems to be associated with an encouraging rate of peritoneal disease free situation at 5 years.

Optimizing antibiotic management for patients with acute appendicitis: A quality improvement study.

BACKGROUND: To decrease surgical site infections after appendectomy for acute appendicitis, preoperative broad-spectrum antibiotics are often used in clinical practice. However, this treatment strategy has come under scrutiny because of increasing rates of antibiotic-resistant infections. METHODS: The aim of this multisite quality improvement project was to decrease the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis with piperacillin-tazobactam without increasing the rate of surgical site infections. Our quality improvement intervention had 2 distinct components: (1) updating electronic health record orders to encourage preoperative administration of narrow-spectrum antibiotics and (2) educating surgeons and emergency department clinicians about selecting appropriate antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes were compared 6 months before and after implementation of the quality improvement intervention. RESULTS: A total of 352 laparoscopic appendectomies were performed during the 6-month preintervention period, and 369 were performed during the 6-month postintervention period. The preintervention period and postintervention period groups had similar baseline demographics, vital signs, and laboratory test values. The rate of preoperative piperacillin-tazobactam administration significantly decreased after the intervention (51.4% preintervention period vs 20.1% postintervention period, P < .001). The rate of surgical site infections was similar in both groups (superficial surgical site infections = 1.4% preintervention period vs 0.8% postintervention period, P = .50; deep surgical site infections = 1.1% preintervention period vs 0.0% postintervention period, P = .06; and organ space surgical site infections = 3.1% preintervention period vs 3.0% postintervention period, P > .99). Rates of 30-day readmission, reoperation, and Clostridioides difficile infection also did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Our quality improvement intervention successfully decreased piperacillin-tazobactam administration without increasing the rate of surgical site infections in patients with acute appendicitis.

Nonoperative Treatment of Diverticulitis and Appendicitis: Which Antibiotic Regimen Fails?

INTRODUCTION: Diverticulitis and appendicitis are common emergency general surgical conditions. Both can be treated with antibiotics alone; however, no antibiotic regimen has been identified as superior to others. In this study, we review different antibiotic regimens and their rates of failure. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients treated empirically with antibiotics for diverticulitis or appendicitis from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020, at an independent academic hospital in the Midwest. RESULTS: A total of 587 (appendicitis, n = 43; diverticulitis, n = 544) patients were included in the cohort. They were equally male (49%) and female (51%) with a median age of 59 y. Three major antibiotic classes were compared: cephalosporin + metronidazole (C + M), penicillins, and quinolone + metronidazole. Appendicitis patients were more likely to receive C + M for empiric treatment (73%, P < 0.001), while diverticulitis patients were more likely to receive quinolone + metronidazole (45%, P < 0.001). Patients empirically treated with antibiotics for appendicitis were more likely than those treated for diverticulitis to require additional antibiotics or procedure within 90 d (33% versus 13%, respectively; P = 0.005). Empiric treatment with C + M for diverticulitis was more likely to be associated with the need for additional antibiotics or procedures within 90 d than treatment with other regimens (P = 0.003). Choice of antibiotic for empiric treatment did not correlate with death at 90 d for appendicitis or diverticulitis. Diverticulitis patients who were initially treated as inpatients and were prescribed C + M at hospital discharge had a higher rate of death than those who were prescribed the other antibiotics (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Empiric antibiotic treatment of appendicitis is more likely to be associated with additional antibiotics or procedure when compared with diverticulitis; however, antibiotic choice did not correlate with any of the other outcomes. Empiric treatment with a C + M for diverticulitis was more likely to be correlated with the need for additional antibiotics or procedure within 90 d.

Acute appendicitis: A block-randomized study on active observation with or without antibiotic treatment.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic treatment of unselected patients with acute appendicitis is safe and effective. However, it is unknown to what extent early provision of antibiotic treatment may represent overtreatment due to spontaneous healing of appendix inflammation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of antibiotic treatment versus active in-hospital observation on spontaneous regression of acute appendicitis. METHOD: Patients who sought acute medical care at Sahlgrenska University Hospital were block-randomized according to age (18-60 years) and systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein <60 mg/L, white blood cell <13,000/µL), in combination with clinical and abdominal characteristics of acute appendicitis. Study patients received antibiotic treatment and active observation, while control patients were allocated to classic active "wait and see observation" for either disease regression or the need for surgical exploration. According to our standard surgical care, certified surgeons in charge decided whether and when appendectomy was necessary. In total, 1,019 patients were screened for eligibility; 203 patients met inclusion criteria, 126 were accepted to participate, 29 declined, and 48 were missed for inclusion. RESULTS: The antibiotic group (n = 69) and the control group (n = 57) were comparable at inclusion. Appendectomy at first hospital stay was 28% and 53% for study and control patients (χ2, P < .004). Life table analysis indicated a time-dependent difference in the need for appendectomy during follow-up (P < .03). Antibiotics prevented surgical exploration and appendectomy by 72% to 50% compared to 47% to 37% in the control group across the time course follow-ups between 5 and 1,200 days. CONCLUSION: Early antibiotic treatment is superior to traditional "wait and see observation" to avoid surgical exploration and appendectomy.

A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis comparing nonoperative versus operative management for uncomplicated appendicitis: a focus on randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to provide a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing conservative and surgical treatment in a population of adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL. We have exclusively incorporated randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies involving participants with complicated appendicitis or children were excluded. The variables considered are as follows: treatment complications, complication-free treatment success at index admission and at 1 year follow-up, length of hospital stay (LOS), quality of life (QoL) and costs. RESULTS: Eight RCTs involving 3213 participants (1615 antibiotics/1598 appendectomy) were included. There was no significant difference between the two treatments in terms of complication rates (RR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.61-1.04, P = 0.07, I2 = 69%). Antibiotics had a reduced treatment efficacy compared with appendectomy (RR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90, p < 0.00001, I2 = 87%) and at 1 year was successful in 540 out of 837 (64.6%, RR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.77, p < 0.00001, I2 = 81%) participants. There was no difference in LOS (mean difference - 0.58 days 95% confidence interval - 1.59 to 0.43, p = 0.26, I2 = 99%). The trial sequential analysis has revealed that, concerning the three primary outcomes, it is improbable that forthcoming RCTs will significantly alter the existing body of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: As further large-scale trials have been conducted, antibiotic therapy proved to be safe, less expensive, but also less effective than surgical treatment. In order to ensure well-informed decisions, further research is needed to explore patient preferences and quality of life outcomes.

Cessation of Antibiotics for Complicated Appendicitis at Discharge Does Not Increase Risk of Post-operative Infection.

PURPOSE: The utilization of home antibiotic therapy following surgery for complicated pediatric appendicitis is highly variable. In 2019, we stopped home antibiotic therapy in this cohort at our institution. We sought to evaluate our outcomes following this protocol change. METHODS: We queried our institutional NSQIP Pediatrics data for all children undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis between January 2015 and May 2022. We identified two cohorts: those discharged with home antibiotics (1/1/15-4/30/19) and those discharged with no home antibiotics (5/1/19-4/30/22). Both groups were treated with response based parenteral antibiotics while hospitalized and discharged when clinically well. Our primary outcome was postoperative deep organ space infection requiring intervention (drainage, aspiration, reoperation, or antibiotics). Secondary outcomes included length of stay, superficial site infection, Clostridium difficile colitis, ER visits, post-operative CT imaging, and readmission. RESULTS: There were 185 patients in the home antibiotic group (83% discharged with antibiotics) and 121 patients in the no home antibiotic group (8.3% discharged with antibiotics). There were no significant differences in deep organ space infection requiring intervention (7% vs. 7.4%, p = 1.0). Our length of stay was not different (4.5 days vs. 3.95 days, p = 0.32), nor were other secondary outcomes or patient characteristics. All patients had documented follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify differences in deep organ space infections, length of stay or other events after eliminating home antibiotic therapy in our complicated appendicitis cohort. The use of home antibiotics following surgery for complicated appendicitis should be reconsidered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-effectiveness of Outpatient Surgery for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The PENDI-CSI Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of outpatient appendectomy in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. BACKGROUND: Given that acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdomen, the introduction of outpatient appendectomy protocols could significantly improve the effectiveness and sustainability of health care systems. METHODS: A total of 300 patients were enrolled from October 2018 to June 2021 in the PENDI-CSI randomized clinical trial: 149 were assigned to the outpatient surgery (OPS) group and 151 to the inpatient surgery (IPS) group, followed by 1 month postoperatively. All patients were aged older than 14 years and had uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, neoplasms, inflammatory bowel disease, and high anesthetic risk (ASA IV). The OPS group was discharged from the postanesthesia care unit while the IPS group was admitted. RESULTS: In total, 128 patients in the OPS group (85.9%) were discharged without admission. Predictors whether patients in the OPS group had to be admitted were aged over 31 years [relative risk (RR): 2.42 (1.04-5.65)], hypertension [RR: 6.21 (3.22-11.97)], anesthetic risk II-III [RR: 2.63 (1.17-5.94)], previous abdominal surgery [RR: 3.34 (1.55-7.20)], postoperative pain with visual analog scale >6 [RR: 4.28 (2.67-6.86)], and postoperative fear [RR: 2.2 (1.04-4.67)]. There were no differences in terms of complications, readmissions, and reinterventions, and the perceived quality was similar in both groups. The outpatient modality produced savings of €1 034.97 per patient ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient appendectomy is safe and effective for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patient-perceived quality is similar to that of IPS, although it successfully reduces hospital costs compared with inpatient appendectomy.

Short Postoperative Intravenous Versus Oral Antibacterial Therapy in Complicated Acute Appendicitis: A Pilot Noninferiority Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to investigate noninferiority of postoperative oral administration of antibiotics in complicated appendicitis. BACKGROUND: Recent investigations have used exclusively intravenous administration of antibiotics when comparing outcomes of postoperative antibacterial therapy in complicated appendicitis. We hypothesized that oral antibacterial treatment results in noninferior outcomes in terms of postoperative infectious complications as intravenous treatment. METHODS: In this pilot, open-label, prospective randomized trial, all consecutive adult patients with complicated appendicitis, including gangrenous appendicitis, perforated appendicitis, and appendicitis with periappendicular abscess between November 2020 and January 2023, were randomly allocated to 24-hour intravenous administration of antibiotics versus 24-hour oral administration of antibiotics after appendectomy. Primary outcomes included 30-day postoperative complications per Comprehensive Complication Index. The secondary outcome was hospital length of stay. Follow-up analysis at 30 days was conducted per intention to treat and per protocol. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04947748). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were enrolled, with 51 and 53 cases allocated to the 24-hour intravenous and the 24-hour oral treatment group, respectively. Demographic profile and disease severity score for acute appendicitis were similar between the study groups. There were no significant differences between the study groups in terms of 30-day postoperative complications. Median Comprehensive Complication Index did not differ between the study groups. Hospital length of stay was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the current pilot randomized controlled trial, the 24-hour oral antibiotic administration resulted in noninferior outcomes when compared with the 24-hour intravenous administration of antibiotics after laparoscopic appendectomy in complicated appendicitis.

Association Between Common Empiric Antibiotic Regimens and Clostridioides Difficile Infection in Pediatric Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides Difficile Infection (CDI) is a serious antibiotic related complication that has been reported among children undergoing treatment of appendicitis. CDI likelihood amongst different empiric antibiotic regimens for appendicitis remains unclear but likely has important implications for antibiotic stewardship. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of the Pediatric Health Information System was used to examine patients ages 1 through 18 who received operative management of acute appendicitis. Common empiric antibiotic regimens 1) Ceftriaxone & Metronidazole (CM) 2) Piperacillin & Tazobactam (PT) and 3) Cefoxitin were compared. Study outcomes were CDI within 28 days post-appendectomy and 30-day post-appendectomy percutaneous drainage procedures. Subset analyses were repeated to only include hospitals that standardized empiric antibiotic choice. RESULTS: Of 105,911 patients, 220 (0.21 %) developed CDI. CDI was more common in patients that received CM (CM 0.29 % vs PT 0.15 % vs Cefoxitin 0.18 %; P < 0.01). On adjusted analysis, PT was associated with a lower likelihood of CDI (OR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.31-0.74) compared to CM which was consistent in hospitals with standardized antibiotic choice. Exposure to more unique antibiotic regimens (OR, 1.70; 95 % CI, 1.50-1.93) and higher total antibiotic days (OR, 1.17; 95 % CI 1.13-1.21) were associated with an increased likelihood of CDI. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of post-appendectomy percutaneous drainage between antibiotic regimens. CONCLUSIONS: CDI is rare following appendectomy for pediatric appendicitis. While PT was associated with statistically lower rates of CDI compared to CM, antibiotic stewardship efforts to avoid mixed regimens and decrease overall antibiotic exposure warrant exploration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Association between bacterial resistance profile and the development of intra-abdominal abscesses in pediatric patients with perforated appendicitis: cohort study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the association between the presence of a microorganism resistant to the antibiotic used in empirical therapy and the development of intra-abdominal abscesses in children with perforated appendicitis. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in patients under 18 years of age who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between November 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020, in whom perforated appendicitis was documented intraoperatively. Peritoneal fluid samples were taken for bacteria culture purposes, and clinical and microbiological data were collected from all patients. RESULTS: A total of 232 patients were included in the study. The most isolated microorganisms were Escherichia coli (80.14%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (7.45%). In addition, 5.31% of E. coli isolates were classified as ESBL-producing organisms. No association was found between a germ resistant to empiric antimicrobial therapy and the development of a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess. Multivariate analysis showed that being a high-risk patient on admission (OR 2.89 (p = 0.01)) was associated with the development of intra-abdominal abscesses postoperatively. CONCLUSION: E. coli was the most commonly isolated microorganism, with a low rate of ESBL-producing isolates. No association between resistance and risk of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess was found. However, it was identified that being a high-risk patient on admission was associated with this complication. TYPE OF STUDY: Prognosis study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Clinical efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment for acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis treatment (ERAT) for acute appendicitis (AA) by conducting a meta-analysis of clinical randomized trials (RCTs). METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RevMan5.3 and STATA14 software were used to for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-six RCTs with 2236 subjects were analyzed. First, operative time, length of hospital stay and duration of bed rest were shorter in the ERAT groups than in the control groups, with the pooled MD and 95 % CI being -13.22(-20.09, -6.35)(p = 0.0002), -2.13 (-2.47, -1.80)(p < 0.00001) and -3.15 (-3.76, -2.53)(p < 0.00001), respectively. Second, patients in the ERAT groups had a lower incidence of complications than the control groups, with a pooled RR and 95 % CI of 0.25(0.18, 0.35)(p < 0.00001). Third, patients who received ERAT returned to normal temperature faster than the control groups, the pooled MD and 95 % CI was -3.39(-4.36, -2.42)(p<0.00001). Finally, the result showed that the recurrence rate in the ERAT groups was approximately twice that of control groups, with the pooled RR and 95 % CI being 2.10(1.02, 4.32)(p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: ERAT results in fewer complications and shorter recovery time. And compared to appendectomy, ERAT reduces operative time and intraoperative bleeding. However, the recurrence of acute appendicitis after ERAT remains a concern. And more multicenter and large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm the benefits of ERAT. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: We have registered on the PROSPERO [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], and the registration number is CRD42023420171.

Non-operative treatment for simple acute appendicitis (NOTA) in children during the COVID-19 era: new lessons from the pandemic.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) was a pandemic disease that was affecting our medical and surgical daily practice badly. The surgical management of acute appendicitis was the gold standard, but new studies suggest the safety of antibiotic treatment alone. Non-operative treatment for simple acute appendicitis (NOTA) avoids surgery, the risks of general anesthesia, and long hospital stays. It also decreases the risk of exposure to coronavirus. We aimed to study the cost-effectiveness and outcome of NOTA during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared it to single-incision pediatric endo-surgery appendectomy (SIPESA). A prospective cohort study for NOTA of patients from 6 to 12 years old in the COVID-19 pandemic period from April 1st, 2020, to April 30th, 2021, patients were divided into two groups: Group S was managed by SIPESA, and Group N was managed by NOTA. Family education and assurance with detailed explanation were done for early detection of any complications, and we continue monitoring the patients until their complete recovery. Group S had 24 cases (40%), mean age 9.3 years. Group N had 36 cases (60%), mean age 9.1 years. Six cases (17%) in group N were converted to surgical management in the first 6 months of the study. The mean cost dropped from $2736/day to $400/day. The mean psychological stress for the children improved from 4.4 in April to 2 in September. The mean follow-up was 3.5 months. NOTA is a feasible, cost-effective approach, and we recommend it, as we have learned this lesson during the COVID-19 pandemic days.

[Surgery, Antibiotic Treatment or Both?]

INTRODUCTION: The 90-year-old female patient with underlying rheumatoid arthritis and spinal canal stenosis was admitted to hospital for pain control. The clinical exam of the lower abdomen was impressively painful and the inflammatory parameters were significantly increased. For further diagnosis a computer tomography was performed, showing a covered perforated appendicitis with a perityphlitic abscess. The conservative therapy with abscess drainage and antibiotics was successful.

The burden of the knowledge-to-action gap in acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: The burden of emergency general surgery (EGS) is higher compared to elective surgery. Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most frequent diseases and its management is dictated by published international clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Adherence to CPG has been reported as heterogeneous. Barriers to clinical implementation were not studied. This study explored barriers to adherence to CPG and the clinico-economic impact of poor compliance. METHODS: Data were extracted from the three-year data lock of the REsiDENT-1 registry, a prospective resident-led multicenter trial. We identified 7 items from CPG published from the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) and the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). We applied our classification proposal and used a five-point Likert scale (Ls) to assess laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) difficulty. Descriptive analyses were performed to explore compliance and group comparisons to assess the impact on outcomes and related costs. We ran logistic regressions to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of CPG. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022, 653 LA were included from 24 centers. 69 residents performed and coordinated data collection. We identified low compliance with recommendations on peritoneal irrigation (PI) (25.73%), abdominal drains (AD) (34.68%), and antibiotic stewardship (34.17%). Poor compliance on PI and AD was associated to higher infectious complications in uncomplicated AA. Hospitalizations were significantly longer in non-compliance except for PI in uncomplicated AA, and costs significantly higher, exception made for antibiotic stewardship in complicated AA. The strongest barriers to CPG implementation were complicated AA and technically challenging LA for PI and AD. Longer operative times and the use of PI negatively affected antibiotic stewardship in uncomplicated AA. Compliance was higher in teaching hospitals and in emergency surgery units. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed low compliance with standardized items influenced by environmental factors and non-evidence-based practices in complex LA. Antibiotic stewardship is sub-optimal. Not following CPG may not influence clinical complications but has an impact in terms of logistics, costs and on the non-measurable magnitude of antibiotic resistance. Structured educational interventions and institutional bundles are required.