Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection and prophylactic appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: The risk-benefit balance of prophylactic appendectomy in patients undergoing left colorectal cancer resection is unclear. The aim of this report is to assess the proportion of histologically abnormal appendices in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection in a unit where standard of care is appendectomy, with consent, when left-sided resection is performed. METHODS: A retrospective study on a prospectively collected database was conducted in a single tertiary-care center. Overall, 717 consecutive patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection between January 2015 and June 2021 were analyzed. The primary outcome was the proportion of histologically abnormal appendix specimens at prophylactic appendectomy. The secondary outcome was complications from prophylactic appendectomy. RESULTS: Overall, 576/717 (80%) patients had appendectomy at colorectal cancer surgery. In total, 234/576 (41%) had a right-/extended-right hemicolectomy or subtotal colectomy which incorporates appendectomy, and 342/576 (59%) had left-sided resection (left-hemicolectomy, anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision) with prophylactic appendectomy. At definitive histology, 534/576 (92.7%) had a normal appendix. The remaining 42/576 (7.3%) showed abnormal findings, including: 14/576 (2.4%) inflammatory appendix pathology, 2/576 (0.3%) endometriosis, 8/576 (1.4%) hyperplastic polyp, and 18/576 (3.1%) appendix tumors, which encompassed six low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs), three carcinoids, and nine serrated polyps. In the 342 patients who had prophylactic appendectomy, 10 (2.9%) had a neoplasm (two LAMN, three carcinoids, and five serrated polyps). There were no complications attributable to appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection is uncommon when prophylactic appendectomy was performed. However, approximately 3% of patients had a synchronous appendix neoplasm.

Pediatric incidental appendectomy: a systematic review.

Incidental appendectomy is the removal of the vermiform appendix accompanying another operation, without evidence of acute appendicitis. It is generally performed to eliminate the risk of future appendicitis. The risks and benefits of incidental appendectomy during various operations in children have been debated for over a century, but need to be revisited in light of innovations in medical practice, including minimally invasive surgery, improved imaging techniques, and use of the appendix as a tubular conduit for reconstruction. A detailed review was undertaken of the techniques, pathology, risks of appendectomy, utility of the appendix, and incidental appendectomy in the treatment of specific pediatric medical conditions. A comprehensive literature search was performed, and retrieved results were reviewed for relevance to the topic. The decision to perform a pediatric incidental appendectomy relies on informed consideration of the individual patient's co-morbid conditions, the indication for the initial operation, the future utility of the appendix, and the risk of future appendiceal pathology. The discussion includes a variety of situations and comorbid conditions that may influence a surgeon's decision to perform incidental appendectomy.

Oncological aspect of incidental appendectomy with regard to histopathological findings: A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to describe the findings on histopathological examination of removed, macroscopically non-diseased, vermicular appendix during another primary surgical procedure (incidental appendectomy (IA)). Previous studies disapproved IA but were based on the possibility of complicated appendicitis. We observed the prevalence of neoplasms of the appendix in IA versus the appendectomy performed due to acute appendicitis (AA). METHODS: The database of histopathology reports of the Surgery Department, University Hospital of Split was reviewed in the period from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. A total of 2832 histopathology reports were reviewed. RESULTS: There was no difference in gender distribution between these two groups, but AA had a statistically significantly lower median patient age compared to the group IA (40 vs. 68 years; P < 0.001). In the AA group, there were 84.5% acute appendicitis, 11.1% normal appendiceal reports, 3.2% appendiceal neoplasms, and 1.2% other pathologies. The group IA had 89.5% normal findings of the appendix, 7.2% appendiceal neoplasms, and 0.5% other pathology. The difference in neoplasm prevalence between IA and AA groups was 4.0% (95%CI: 2.2 to 5.8), P < 0.001. The number of incidental appendectomies needed to detect one neoplasm of the appendix is 25. CONCLUSION: Incidental appendectomies in patients undergoing abdominal surgery revealed a relatively high prevalence of appendiceal neoplasms above the age of 60 years. Prospective studies about incidental appendectomies, their clinical consequences, and impact on prognosis should be performed to define the value of incidental appendectomy in those patients.

Case report: Duplicated appendicitis with history of cloacal exstrophy causing bowel obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Cloacal and bladder exstrophy are rare embryological defects that can cause developmental disruption of surrounding organ structures, the pelvis, spinal cord, and small intestines being the most commonly affected. Duplicated appendix is another rare embryological defect that has historically caused confusing clinical presentations. Our case highlights a rare instance of a patient with cloacal exstrophy who presented with a bowel obstruction and an associated inflamed duplicated appendix. CASE PRESENTATION: A newborn male is born with omphalocele-exstrophy-imperforate anus-spinal defects (OEIS) complex. As primary surgical reconstruction was pursued, the patient was found to have a non-inflamed duplicated appendix, which was left unremoved. In the following months, the patient experienced episodes of small bowel obstruction, eventually requiring surgical intervention. During this operation, the duplicated appendix was noted to be inflamed, prompting removal of both appendices. DISCUSSION: This case highlights the increased prevalence of duplicated appendix in a patient with cloacal exstrophy, as well as the utility of prophylactic appendectomy for patients incidentally found to have a duplicated appendix intraoperatively. The duplicated appendix may lead to increased rates of complications and atypical presentation of appendicitis, supporting the practice of prophylactic appendectomy in patients with an incidentally found duplicated appendix. CONCLUSION: We suggest clinicians be aware of the association and potentially atypical presentation of appendicitis in patients with a duplicated appendix, particularly in the setting of cloacal exstrophy. The decision to prophylactically remove an incidentally found, non-inflamed duplicated appendix may be beneficial in preventing confusing clinical presentations and future complications.

Incidental Prophylactic Appendectomy Is Associated with a Profound Microbial Dysbiosis in the Long-Term.

Incidental prophylactic surgeries are performed in certain situations. Incidental prophylactic appendectomies were common practice within opened bariatric surgeries. The gut microbiota has emerged as an important actor within the homeostasis of the host. A new hypothesis has been formulated about the appendix function in relation to gut microbiota. Our objective was to study the gut microbiota profiles of patients that had suffered from an incidental prophylactic appendectomy during their bariatric surgeries, while comparing them to patients whose appendixes had remained intact. A case-control observational prospective study of 40 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, with or without an incidental prophylactic appendectomy, during 2004-2008 with an evaluation of their gut microbiota populations at the end of 2016 was conducted by sequencing the 16 S rRNA gene by Next Generation Sequencing of patients' stools and appendix tissues. Patients with their appendix removed showed lower levels of richness and diversity of their gut microbiota populations. Odoribacter, Bilophila, Butyricimonas, and Faecalibacterium levels were increased in the Intact group, while Lachnobacterium suffered an expansion in the group without the appendix. Moreover, a linear regression model introduced the concept that Butyricimonas and Odoribacter may be implicated in insulin regulation. Thus, gut microbiota should be considered in the decisions of practical surgery, regarding the appendix as a mediator of homeostasis in the host. Butyricimonas and Odoribacter require further investigation as key bacteria implicated in insulin regulation.

Multi-origin mucinous neoplasm: Should we prophylactically remove the appendix in the setting of mucinous ovarian tumors?

INTRODUCTION: Tumors of the ovary and appendix have been well documented in the setting of pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) with constant debate over tumor origin. Generally, these tumors are found to have a single primary origin, most commonly the appendix, with metastatic spread to the ovaries. CARE PRESENTATION: Here we present a 61-year-old female who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TAH-BSO) for a primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma. She presented to our institution one year later with abdominal pain and a palpable right lower quadrant mass, which on histopathologic exam was found to be a primary low grade mucinous appendiceal neoplasm (LAMN), alluding to the potential of two separate primary disease processes. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: With two primary, non-synchronous lesions, a thorough literature review suggests that during the patient's initial TAH-BSO, she could have additionally undergone an appendectomy. In doing so, this would provide accurate, complete staging and determine if the two neoplasms were truly primary in origin or metastatic. In addition, new genetic markers are being discovered, such as the Special AT-rich sequence-binding protein 2 (SATB2) marker, which has been found to be positive in those with a LAMN and negative in those with a primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma. By acquiring appropriate and complete staging we can better diagnose and treat these neoplasms.

Amyand's hernia: 11years of experience.

PURPOSE: Presence of the vermiform appendix in an inguinal hernia sac is known as Amyand's hernia. This may present as a tender inguinal swelling and is often misdiagnosed as irreducible or strangulated hernia. METHODS: Between January 2003 and December 2013 we treated 4498 patients with inguinal hernias and performed 3267 appendectomies. Among these; 46 had an Amyand's hernia. Age, sex, presenting symptoms, treatment modality, histopathological findings, duration of hospitalization, and post-surgical outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: All patients were boys. The mean age was 16.7months (15days-8years). 37 (80.4%) right, 2 (4.3%) left and 7 (15.2%) bilateral hernioplasties were performed. Nine patients underwent emergency surgery with an initial diagnosis of incarcerated hernia; Amyand's hernia was an incidental finding in the remaining 37 patients. Operative findings included 33 normal appendices, 9 inflamed appendices, one perforated appendix, and three appendices adherent to the hernia sac. Eighteen patients had appendectomy during hernia repair, and the other 33 had hernia repair without appendectomy. None of the patients developed recurrent hernia or appendicitis within the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: In Amyand's hernia the appendix should be examined carefully. A classification of Amyand's hernia according to the presenting symptoms and inflammatory status of the appendix may help to determine whether or not to proceed with appendectomy.