Change in the Diagnosis of Appendicitis by Using a Computed Tomography Scan and the Necessity for a New Scoring System to Determine the Severity of the Appendicitis

Background:The accurate diagnosis of complicated appendicitis has been improved by using various diagnostic modalities. However, no preoperative diagnostic method could completely confirm the results. Therefore, preoperative diagnosis of complicated appendicitis to have the right management is still a huge challenge.Objectives:The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasound combined with pediatric appendicitis score for differentiation between acute uncomplicated appendicitis and acute complicated appendicitis in a pediatric population.Methods:We prospectively evaluated 120 pediatric patients who underwent surgery for acute appendicitis from November 2017 to June 2019. Pediatric appendicitis score (PAS) was calculated and ultrasound (US) was performed before surgery. The histopathology of phlegmonous appendicitis corresponds to uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA), while gangrenous appendicitis and perforation are classified as complicated appendicitis (ACA).Results:Histopathologically, the results provided a diagnosis of acute appendicitis including 86 (71.7%) patients with AUA and 34 (28.3%) children with ACA. US findings showed a sensitivity of 23.5%, the specificity of 95.4%, PPV of 66.7%, NPV of 75.9%, and an accuracy of 75%. PAS of 8 was found to be the most appropriate cutoff point compatible with ACA; it resulted in a sensitivity of 76.5% and a specificity of 84.1%. Combining ultrasound with a pediatric appendicitis score resulted in a higher specificity to distinguish complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis when compared with ultrasound or PAS solely.Conclusions:the US is highly specific but nonsensitive for detecting complicated pediatric appendicitis. Combining ultrasound with pediatric appendicitis is a very good concept to distinguish complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in a pediatric population.

2412 Cost effectiveness analysis of operative Versus antibiotic management for uncomplicated appendicitis

PurposeThe pre-interventional differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis is decisive for treatment. In the context of conservative therapy, the definitive diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis is mandatory. This study investigates the ability of clinical scoring systems and imaging to differentiate between the two entities.MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of two cohorts from two tertiary referral centers in Switzerland and Germany. All consecutive patients underwent appendectomy between January 2008 and April 2013 (in the first cohort) or between January 2017 and June 2019 (the second cohort). Exclusion criteria did not apply as all patients found by the database search and received an appendectomy were included. Diagnostic testing and calculation of a receiver operating curve were performed to identify a cutoff for clinical scores that resulted in a minimum sensitivity of 90% to detect complicated appendicitis. The cutoff was combined with additional diagnostic imaging criteria to see if diagnostic properties could be improved.ResultsNine hundred fifty-six patients were included in the analysis. Two hundred twenty patients (23%) had complicated appendicitis, and 736 patients (77%) had uncomplicated appendicitis or no inflammation. The complicated appendicitis cohort had a mean Alvarado score of 7.03 and a mean AIR of 5.21. This compared to a mean Alvarado of 6.53 and a mean AIR of 4.07 for the uncomplicated appendicitis cohort. The highest Alvarado score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 5 (sensitivity = 95%, specificity 8.99%). The highest AIR score with a sensitivity of > 90% to detect complicated appendicitis was ≧ 3 (sensitivity 91.82%, specificity 18.53). The analysis showed that additional CT information did not improve the sensitivity of the proposed cut-offs.ConclusionAIR and Alvarado scores showed limited capability to distinguish between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis even with additional imaging in this retrospective cohort. As conservative management of appendicitis needs to exclude patients with complicated disease reliably, appendectomy seems until now to remain the safest option to prevent undertreatment of this mostly benign disease.

Importance An increasing amount of evidence supports the use of antibiotics instead of surgery for treating patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Objective To compare antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by computed tomography (CT). Design, Setting, and Participants The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 2009 until June 2012 in Finland. The trial enrolled 530 patients aged 18 to 60 years with uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by a CT scan. Patients were randomly assigned to early appendectomy or antibiotic treatment with a 1-year follow-up period. Interventions Patients randomized to antibiotic therapy received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin (500 mg once daily) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times per day). Patients randomized to the surgical treatment group were assigned to undergo standard open appendectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point for the surgical intervention was the successful completion of an appendectomy. The primary end point for antibiotic-treated patients was discharge from the hospital without the need for surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during a 1-year follow-up period. Results There were 273 patients in the surgical group and 257 in the antibiotic group. Of 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0% to 100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 70 patients (27.3%; 95% CI, 22.0% to 33.2%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis. Of the 256 patients available for follow-up in the antibiotic group, 186 (72.7%; 95% CI, 66.8% to 78.0%) did not require surgery. The intention-to-treat analysis yielded a difference in treatment efficacy between groups of −27.0% (95% CI, −31.6% to ∞) ( P = .89). Given the prespecified noninferiority margin of 24%, we were unable to demonstrate noninferiority of antibiotic treatment relative to surgery. Of the 70 patients randomized to antibiotic treatment who subsequently underwent appendectomy, 58 (82.9%; 95% CI, 72.0% to 90.8%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, 7 (10.0%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 19.5%) had complicated acute appendicitis, and 5 (7.1%; 95% CI, 2.4% to 15.9%) did not have appendicitis but received appendectomy for suspected recurrence. There were no intra-abdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority compared with appendectomy. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period, and those who required appendectomy did not experience significant complications. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01022567

An increasing amount of evidence supports the use of antibiotics instead of surgery for treating patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. To compare antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by computed tomography (CT). The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 2009 until June 2012 in Finland. The trial enrolled 530 patients aged 18 to 60 years with uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by a CT scan. Patients were randomly assigned to early appendectomy or antibiotic treatment with a 1-year follow-up period. Patients randomized to antibiotic therapy received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin (500 mg once daily) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times per day). Patients randomized to the surgical treatment group were assigned to undergo standard open appendectomy. The primary end point for the surgical intervention was the successful completion of an appendectomy. The primary end point for antibiotic-treated patients was discharge from the hospital without the need for surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during a 1-year follow-up period. There were 273 patients in the surgical group and 257 in the antibiotic group. Of 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0% to 100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 70 patients (27.3%; 95% CI, 22.0% to 33.2%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis. Of the 256 patients available for follow-up in the antibiotic group, 186 (72.7%; 95% CI, 66.8% to 78.0%) did not require surgery. The intention-to-treat analysis yielded a difference in treatment efficacy between groups of -27.0% (95% CI, -31.6% to ∞) (P = .89). Given the prespecified noninferiority margin of 24%, we were unable to demonstrate noninferiority of antibiotic treatment relative to surgery. Of the 70 patients randomized to antibiotic treatment who subsequently underwent appendectomy, 58 (82.9%; 95% CI, 72.0% to 90.8%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, 7 (10.0%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 19.5%) had complicated acute appendicitis, and 5 (7.1%; 95% CI, 2.4% to 15.9%) did not have appendicitis but received appendectomy for suspected recurrence. There were no intra-abdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. Among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority compared with appendectomy. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period, and those who required appendectomy did not experience significant complications. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01022567.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Alvarado score is beneficial in identifying complicated versus uncomplicated acute appendicitis in elderly patients. A retrospective review was conducted of patients aged 65 years and older who underwent an appendectomy for pathologically confirmed appendicitis. A review of 310 operative reports and patient charts from October 2012 to December 2016 yielded 216 patients. Patients were grouped based on complicated versus uncomplicated appendicitis. One hundred ten patients had complicated appendicitis, whereas 106 patients were uncomplicated. Among the complicated appendicitis patients, 76.4 per cent were perforated, 38.2 per cent were gangrenous, and 34.5 per cent had an abscess. The complicated appendicitis group had a higher mean duration of symptoms (2.70 ± 3.41 days vs 2.09 ± 3.08 days, P = 0.011). Appendectomies that were open or converted to open were more likely to be associated with complicated appendicitis (75% vs 48%, P = 0.012). Mean hospital length of stay was greater in those with complicated appendicitis (5.34 ± 5.56 days vs 3.12 ± 2.86 days, P < 0.001). The two groups did not differ on mean Alvarado score (complicated = 6.96 ± 1.99 vs uncomplicated = 6.72 ± 1.85, P = 0.36). Only 62.5 per cent of patients had an Alvarado score that met the cutoff for acute appendicitis. The Alvarado score was not able to differentiate complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in elderly patients.

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common emergency abdominal disease, and recent studies have evaluated conservative treatment using antibiotics for uncomplicated appendicitis. Although the efficacy of conservative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis is known, its efficacy for complicated appendicitis remains unknown, so are risk factors for the conservative treatment of appendicitis. In our institution, conservative treatment has long been the first choice for most appendicitis cases, except for perforation. Therefore, this novel study investigated the outcomes of conservative treatment for uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis and the risk factors associated with conservative treatment. To investigate the indication of conservative treatment by antibiotics for uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. We investigated 270 patients who received conservative treatment for acute appendicitis at the Nishitokyo Central General Hospital, between April 2011 and February 2022. Twenty-eight (10.3%) patients were resistant to conservative treatment and underwent surgery. We retrospectively investigated the outcomes of conservative treatment for appendicitis and the risk factors for resistance to conservative treatment using the receiver operating characteristic curves and Cox hazard model. Two hundred and forty-two (89.7%) patients improved with conservative treatment. The significant and independent predictors of resistance to conservative treatment were body temperature ≥ 37.3 °C, appendicolith and Douglas sinus fluid visible on computed tomography (CT). The rate of resistance to conservative treatment was 66.7% (6/9) for patients with the above three factors, 22.9% (8/35) for patients with two factors (appendicolith and body temperature ≥ 37.3 °C), 16.7% (2/12) for patients with two factors (Douglas sinus fluid and appendicolith) and 11.1% (1/9) for patients with two factors (Douglas sinus fluid and body temperature ≥ 37.3 °C). A temperature ≥ 37.3 °C, appendicolith and Douglas sinus fluid on CT might be clinical risk factors of resistance to conservative treatment for acute appendicitis.

To prospectively assess the performance of pediatric appendicitis score (PAS) in diagnosing acute appendicitis in the children with lower abdominal pain and correlated with ultrasound findings; and to assess the impact of the PAS on clinical outcome and its efficacy in differentiating between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis. A prospective study was done which included cases of lower abdominal pain. Appendectomy was done for PAS ≥ 6, and diagnosis was confirmed on histopathology. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was created to assess the PAS performance. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ultrasonography in diagnosing appendicitis were assessed, and analysis of agreement between ultrasonography and PAS score was done by kappa statistics. Of 260 cases with lower abdominal pain, 205 were suspected of having appendicitis. One hundred fifty-nine had PAS ≥ 6. There were 2/159 (1.26%) cases of negative appendectomies and 2/46 (4.34%) cases of missed appendicitis. The mean PAS was significantly higher in patients with appendicitis than in those without appendicitis. The area under the ROC curve was 0.9925. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of PAS were 98.74%, 95.65%, 95.7% and 95.65%, respectively. Complicated appendicitis had significantly more PAS, fever, and cough tenderness than uncomplicated appendicitis. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography were 86.79% and 17.39%, respectively. Agreement between ultrasonography-proven appendicitis and PAS-dependent appendicitis was weak. PAS has high efficacy in diagnosing acute appendicitis. Clinical outcome was more favorable with the use of PAS. Ultrasonography should be used judiciously and in combination with clinical judgment.

Acute Appendicitis in Infants: Still a Diagnostic Dilemma

Background: Acute appendicitis is a leading cause of surgical emergencies worldwide. Distinguishing between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis preoperatively remains a clinical challenge. Complex cases, such as those involving perforation or gangrene, are associated with increased morbidity, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. Simple, cost-effective biomarkers are needed to aid in early risk stratification. Material and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted over 18 months at a tertiary care hospital. A total of 187 adult patients undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis were included. Data on demographics, clinical presentation, Alvarado score, and preoperative laboratory parameters—including serum sodium, platelet count, and white blood cell count—were collected. The final diagnosis of uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis was based on intraoperative findings and histopathological examination. Patients were categorized into uncomplicated and complex groups, and statistical analyses, including independent t-tests and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, were performed. Results: Of the 187 patients, 62 (33.2%) were diagnosed with complicated appendicitis. Patients with complicated appendicitis had significantly lower mean serum sodium levels (134.6 ± 3.8 mmol/L) compared to those with uncomplicated appendicitis (137.27 ± 2.9 mmol/L; p &lt; 0.001). The mean platelet count was higher in the complicated group (2.71 ± 0.8 lakh/µL vs. 2.63 ± 0.7 lakh/µL), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.509). However, the neutrophil percentage was significantly higher in the complicated group (84.49% vs. 80.70%; p = 0.012). The Alvarado score demonstrated a moderate predictive ability for complicated appendicitis, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.617 (p = 0.017). Conclusion: Preoperative hyponatremia and an elevated neutrophil percentage are significant and readily available predictors of complicated appendicitis. While thrombocytosis showed a non-significant trend, serum sodium levels can serve as a valuable adjunct to clinical scoring systems for early identification of high-risk patients, potentially guiding surgical timing and management strategies. Keywords: Appendicitis, Complicated Appendicitis, Hyponatremia, Thrombocytosis, Biomarkers, Alvarado Score.

Several studies have demonstrated the superiority of the laparoscopic approach in uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis with conflicting results. As a result the role of laparoscopy in the management of appendicitis in general and complicated or perforated appendicitis, in particular, is still undefined. A retrospective, observational study design was used to analyze multicenter outcomes using the University HealthSystem Consortium database. A 3-year discharge data of all open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) procedures from 2006 to 2008 in adult patients older than 18 years for complicated or uncomplicated appendicitis was accessed using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Data on several surgical outcome measures such as observed mortality, overall patient morbidity, intensive care unit admission rate, 30-day readmission rate, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs were collected from the University HealthSystem Consortium database. Stratification by University HealthSystem Consortium-specific severity of illness groups and disease diagnosis of complicated or perforated and uncomplicated appendicitis was performed. A total of 40,337 appendectomy procedures performed during 2006 to 2008 in adult patients were included in the study. Laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis resulted in significantly better surgical outcomes. However, surprisingly, these outcomes resulted in comparable but not significantly reduced hospital costs (7825 ± 6,009 for LA vs 7841 ± 13,147 for OA; P > 0.05). Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated or perforated appendicitis showed lower mortality, reduced overall morbidity (17.43% for LA vs 26.68% for OA; P < 0.001), relatively less 30-day readmission rate, fewer intensive care unit admissions, significantly shorter length of hospital stay (4.34 ± 4.84 days for LA vs 7.31 ± 9.43 for OA; P < 0.001), and reduced hospital costs (12,125 ± 14,430 for LA vs 17,594 ± 28,065 for OA; P < 0.001) compared with patients undergoing OA. On stratification for severity of illness in both complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy resulted in a greater or comparable clinical benefit than open appendectomy. Comparable clinical benefit was observed in minor severity patients and moderate and major/extreme severity patients showed vastly improved surgical outcomes with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic appendectomy is superior or comparable to open appendectomy in terms of several surgical outcome measures for both uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis, across most illness severity groups. Thus, laparoscopic appendectomy may be the preferred technique, irrespective of appendicitis diagnosis or disease severity.

Background:Diagnostic work-up of acute appendicitis remains challenging. While some guidelines advise to use a risk stratification based on clinical parameters, others use standard imaging in all patients. As non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis has been identified as feasible and safe, differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is of paramount importance. We reviewed the literature to describe the optimal strategy for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Methods:A narrative review about the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adult patients was conducted. Both diagnostic strategies and goals were analyzed.Results:For diagnosing acute appendicitis, both ruling in and ruling out the disease are important. Clinical and laboratory findings individually do not suffice, but when combined in a diagnostic score, a better risk prediction can be made for having acute appendicitis. However, for accurate diagnosis imaging seems obligatory in patients suspected for acute appendicitis. Scoring systems combining clinical and imaging features may differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and may enable ruling out complicated appendicitis. Within conservatively treated patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, predictive factors for non-responsiveness to antibiotics and recurrence of appendicitis need to be defined in order to optimize treatment outcomes.Conclusion:Standard imaging increases the diagnostic power for both ruling in and ruling out acute appendicitis. Incorporating imaging features in clinical scoring models may provide better differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Optimizing patient selection for antibiotic treatment of appendicitis may minimize recurrence rates, resulting in better treatment outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the Alvarado and Pediatric Appendicitis Score (PAS) scoring systems and to establish which one is more reliable in setting the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. All children operated on because of acute appendicitis from October 2011 to May 2013 were enrolled in this prospective study. Both clinical scoring systems have been compared over the same patients, and cutoff values were determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. A total of 311 patients were included in the study, and 265 (85.2%) of them had acute appendicitis. Mean Alvarado score for patients with appendicitis was 8.2 and 6.7 for those without (P < 0.001). Mean PAS for patients with appendicitis was of 7.8 and 6.6 for those without (P < 0.001). Based on the ROC curve analysis, a cutoff value for both scoring systems was 7. In patients with acute appendicitis and Alvarado score of 7 or higher, the correct diagnosis would have been set in 236 patients (sensitivity, 89%; specificity, 59%; positive predictive value, 93.1%), whereas in patients with acute appendicitis and a PAS of 7 or higher, the correct diagnosis would have been set in 228 patients (sensitivity, 86%; specificity, 50%; positive predictive value, 90.1%). No significant difference was found in sensitivity and specificity between the observed scoring systems. Both scoring systems can be of assistance in setting the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, but none has adequate predictive values in assessing acute appendicitis and none can be used as an exclusive standard in setting the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. The final decision still remaines on the opinion of an expert pediatric surgeon.

Gangrenous appendicitis falls to the midpoint of the continuum between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. We present an eight-year single-center retrospective review of uncomplicated, complicated and gangrenous appendicitis. To analyze the presentation of gangrenous appendicitis in our population. We reviewed the presentation, as well as the laboratory, surgical, and pathological findings for complicated, uncomplicated, and gangrenous appendicitis. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify predictors of gangrenous and of complicated appendicitis. During the study period, 865 children had uncomplicated appendicitis and 134 had complicated appendicitis. Younger age, duration of illness as well as vomiting, diarrhea, and fever were more common in complicated than uncomplicated appendicitis. White blood cell count, neutrophil count and C-reactive protein were higher in complicated appendicitis. Logistic regression showed that vomiting and presence of fever occurred more frequently in children with non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis than with other uncomplicated appendicitis. Laboratory results for non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis were comparable to those of complicated appendicitis, as was usage of radiography and computed tomography. Gangrenous appendicitis shares similar historical elements with complicated appendicitis and has a similar laboratory. These children, like those with complicated appendicitis, may not be optimal candidates for non-operative management.

Adoption and implementation of evidence-based practices into pediatric appendectomy care.