Presumptive Diagnosis Of Acute Appendicitis Research Articles

Clinical effectiveness study of the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis in the elderly

Introduction. Acute appendicitis is among the three most frequent surgical diseases. The lifetime likelihood of developing acute appendicitis is around 7%. The incidence of acute appendicitis reduces with age after adolescence. Several studies evaluated the relevance of the current scores to the general population, mostly children, but a limited number of studies have studied the elderly population. This study aims to assess the clinical effectiveness of the new diagnostic score for the elderly population in comparison to both the Alvarado score and the non-standardized score. Material and methods. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the diagnostic score of acute appendicitis, we examined 78 patients who were admitted to emergency unit of the Saint Archangel Michael Municipal Clinical Hospital during 20182021 with the presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Of all patients admitted, Acute Appendicitis was confirmed on pathological examination in 22 (28.2%) patients. The average age of patients was 73.5±13.5 years (minimum - 60 years, maximum - 87 years). The ratio of males to females was 1:1.6. Results. Comparative evaluation of the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis and the non-standardized clinical-echographic examination for acute appendicitis diagnosis showed better performance indicators of the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis compared to the non-standardized clinical method for acute appendicitis diagnosis. The high sensitivity of the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis was statistically demonstrated (ƛ2 = 4.32; p < 0.05), a lower rate of missed acute appendicitis cases in the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis (ƛ2 = 4.32; p < 0.05), the „grey area” is lower in the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis (ƛ2 = 5.28; p < 0.05), than in the non-standardized diagnosis. It was shown to have a lower rate of acute appendicitis cases in the „grey area” of the total number of acute appendicitis cases (ƛ2 = 4.9; p < 0.05). Benchmarking indicators such as specificity and diagnostic accuracy showed no statistically significant differences. At the same time, a definite increase in specificity and accuracy was observed for the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis compared to non-standardized clinical diagnosis. Conclusions. Diagnosing acute appendicitis in elderly patients remains challenging due to the numerous potential diagnoses with similar clinical manifestations that are observed in this patient population. It was necessary to utilize clinical risk-scoring systems that could aid in the prompt identification of patients with acute appendicitis. This study concludes that the New diagnostic score has higher clinical efficiency in diagnosing acute appendicitis in elderly patients. It has a sensitivity of up to 93.15%, compared to the unstandardized clinical method and the Alvarado diagnostic score, and is independent of „risk factors” such as obesity and atypical vermiform appendix localization.

Appendicitis predictive score for children younger than 4 years

The clinical presentation of acute appendicitis in infants and young children is nonspecific. The diagnosis is often delayed and is accompanied by high rates of appendiceal perforation. The aim of the present study was to develop an early diagnostic scale for acute appendicitis in children less than 4 years of age. Results: The scale had a high discrimination index area under the ROC curve of 0.96 (95%CI 0.88-0.99), sensitivity of 95.1% (95%CI 86.3-99.0%), specificity of 90.0% (95%CI 55.7-89.5%), positive predictive value of 98.3% (95%CI 90.0-99.7%) and negative predictive value of 75.0% (95%CI 49.4-90.2). Conclusions: In this study, a risk score based on characteristics of children less than 4 years with abdominal pain was developed that may help predict a patient’s risk of developing acute appendicitis. 100 children less than 4 years of age with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis were retrospectively evaluated in 4 hospitals. The case group comprised 90 patients with histopathological diagnosis of positive appendicitis (with inflammation in the appendiceal wall) while the control group comprised 10 patients with a histopathological diagnosis of negative appendicitis (without inflammation). Epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and ultrasound variables were screened using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) and logistic regression to construct a predictive risk score. Accuracy of the score was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Final model comprised 4 variables (Blumberg's sign, C-reactive protein, neutrophil-lymphocyte index and positive ultrasound). The scale had a high discrimination index area under the ROC curve of 0.96 (95%CI 0.88-0.99), sensitivity of 95.1% (95%CI 86.3-99.0%), specificity of 90.0% (95%CI 55.7-89.5%), positive predictive value of 98.3% (95%CI 90.0-99.7%) and negative predictive value of 75.0% (95%CI 49.4-90.2). In this study, a risk score based on characteristics of children less than 4 years with abdominal pain was developed that may help predict a patient’s risk of developing acute appendicitis.

Clinical scores (Alvarado and AIR scores) versus imaging (ultrasound and CT scan) in the diagnosis of equivocal cases of acute appendicitis: a randomized controlled study.

A total of 286 consecutive adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis were included. The clinical scores, including Alvarado and AIR scores and ultrasound, were done for all patients. Abdominal and pelvic CT scans were done for 192 patients to resolve the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy rate of both clinical scores and imaging (ultrasound and CT scan) were compared. The final histopathology was used as the gold standard for which the diagnostic feasibility of the clinical score and imaging were compared. Out of 286 total patients who presented with right lower quadrant abdominal pain, a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made in 211 patients (123 males and 88 females) after thorough clinical evaluation, clinical scores, and imaging, and they were submitted to appendicectomy. The overall prevalence of acute appendicitis proved by histopathology as a gold standard was 89.1% (188 patients) with a negative appendectomy rate of 10.9%. Simple acute appendicitis was reported in 165 (78.2%) patients and perforated appendicitis in 23 (10.9%) patients. For patients with equivocal clinical scores (≥4 to ≤6), the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy rate of CT scan were significantly higher than those of Alvarado and AIR scores. Patients with low clinical scores (≤4) and high clinical scores (≥7), the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy rate of clinical scores and imaging were comparable. The diagnostic feasibility of AIR scores was significantly higher than the Alvarado score, and the clinical scores were associated with significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than ultrasound. CT scan is unlikely to be needed and will add little to the diagnosis of acute appendicitis for patients with high clinical scores (≥7). The sensitivity of the CT scan for perforated appendicitis was lower than that for nonperforated appendicitis. The use of CT scans for query cases did not change the negative appendectomy rate. CT scan evaluation is beneficial only for patients with equivocal clinical scores. For patients with high clinical scores, surgery is recommended. AIR score was superior to the Alvarado score in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. A CT scan is usually not required for patients with low scores since acute appendicitis is unlikely; in such cases, ultrasound could be of help to exclude other diagnoses.

Is it possible to predict the severity of acute appendicitis? Reliability of predictive models based on easily available blood variables

IntroductionRecent evidence confirms that the treatment of acute appendicitis is not necessarily surgical, and selected patients with uncomplicated appendicitis can benefit from a non-operative management. Unfortunately, no cost-effective test has been proven to be able to effectively predict the degree of appendicular inflammation as yet, therefore, patient selection is too often left to the personal choice of the emergency surgeon. Our paper aims to clarify if basic and readily available blood tests can give reliable prognostic information to build up predictive models to help the decision-making process.MethodsClinical notes of 2275 patients who underwent an appendicectomy with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis were reviewed, taking into consideration basic preoperative blood tests and histology reports on the surgical specimens. Variables were compared with univariate and multivariate analysis, and predictive models were created.Results18.2% of patients had a negative appendicectomy, 9.6% had mucosal only inflammation, 53% had transmural inflammation and 19.2% had gangrenous appendicitis. A strong correlation was found between degree of inflammation and lymphocytes count and CRP/Albumin ratio, both at univariate and multivariate analysis. A predictive model to identify cases of gangrenous appendicitis was developed.ConclusionLow lymphocyte count and high CRP/Albumin ratio combined into a predictive model may have a role in the selection of patients who deserve appendicectomy instead of non-operative management of acute appendicitis.

Value of fecal calprotectin in prediction of acute appendicitis based on a proposed model of machine learning.

The aim of this study is to apply random forest (RF), one of the machine learning (ML) algorithms, to a dataset consisting of patients with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AAp) and to reveal the most important factors associated with the diagnosis of AAp based on the variable importance. An open-access dataset comparing two patient groups with (n=40) and without (n=44) AAp to predict biomarkers for AAp was used for this case-control study. RF was used for modeling the data set. The data were divided into two training and test dataset (80: 20). Accuracy, balanced accuracy (BC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) performance metrics were appraised for model performance. Accuracy, BC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and F1 scores pertaining to the RF model were 93.8%, 93.8%, 87.5%, 100%, 100%, 88.9%, and 93.3%, respectively. Following the variable importance values regarding the model, the variables most associated with the diagnosis and prediction of AAp were fecal calprotectin (100 %), radiological imaging (89.9%), white blood test (51.8%), C-reactive protein (47.1%), from symptoms onset to the hospital visit (19.3%), patients age (18.4%), alanine aminotransferase levels >40 (<1%), fever (<1%), and nausea/vomiting (<1%), respectively. A prediction model was developed for AAp with the ML method in this study. Thanks to this model, biomarkers that predict AAp with high accuracy were determined. Thus, the decision-making process of clinicians for diagnosing AAp will be facilitated, and the risks of perforation and unnecessary operations will be minimized thanks to the timely diagnosis with high accuracy.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUNDAcute appendicitis (AAp) is the most frequent cause of acute abdominal pain, and appendectomy is the most frequent emergency procedure that is performed worldwide. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused delays in managing diseases requiring emergency approaches such as AAp and trauma.AIMTo compare the demographic, clinical, and histopathological outcomes of patients with AAp who underwent appendectomy during pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods.METHODSThe demographic, clinical, biochemical, and histopathological parameters were evaluated and compared in patients who underwent appendectomy with the presumed diagnosis of AAp in the pre-COVID-19 (October 2018-March 2020) and COVID-19 (March 2020-July 2021) periods.RESULTSAdmissions to our tertiary care hospital for AAp increased 44.8% in the COVID-19 period. Pre-COVID-19 (n = 154) and COVID-19 (n = 223) periods were compared for various parameters, and we found that there were statistically significant differences in terms of variables such as procedures performed on the weekdays or weekends [odds ratio (OR): 1.76; P = 0.018], presence of AAp findings on ultrasonography (OR: 15.4; P < 0.001), confirmation of AAp in the histopathologic analysis (OR: 2.6; P = 0.003), determination of perforation in the appendectomy specimen (OR: 2.2; P = 0.004), the diameter of the appendix (P < 0.001), and hospital stay (P = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of interval between the initiation of symptoms and admission to the hospital between the pre-COVID-19 (median: 24 h; interquartile range: 34) and COVID-19 (median: 36 h; interquartile range: 60) periods (P = 0.348). The interval between the initiation of symptoms until the hospital admission was significantly longer in patients with perforated AAp regardless of the COVID-19 or pre-COVID-19 status (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONThe present study showed that in the COVID-19 period, the ultrasonographic determination rate of AAp, perforation rate of AAp, and duration of hospital stay increased. On the other hand, negative appendectomy rate decreased. There was no statistically significant delay in hospital admissions that would delay the diagnosis of AAp in the COVID-19 period.

EP-66 Omental infarct – A rare cause of Right iliac fossa pain in a child

Abstract Introduction Idiopathic omental infarction is a very rare cause of abdominal pain in the pediatric age group. We report a case of suspected acute appendicitis in an 8-year-old child, noted to have omental infarct on diagnostic laparoscopy. Case presentation An 8-year-old male child with no other medical issues presented to the acute surgical take with a 2-day history of right iliac fossa pain. The pain was of sudden onset and there were no other associated urinary or bowel symptoms. On clinical examination, there was right iliac fossa tenderness. There were mildly raised inflammatory markers. An ultrasound scan performed showed a possible blind-ending tubular structure measuring 7mm in the right iliac fossa with a small amount of free fluids. A presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made and the patient was taken to theatre. Upon diagnostic laparoscopy, we noted blood in the RIF with a normal-looking appendix and area of omental infarction adjacent to the appendix. We proceeded to excise the area of mesenteric infarction using an energy device. The appendix was removed to avoid future diagnostic confusion. Conclusion Idiopathic omental infarction is an extremely rare cause of abdominal pain in children and may mimic acute appendicitis. Ultrasound imaging may be misleading. Laparoscopic exploration allows for accurate diagnosis as well as treatment.

Acute appendicitis secondary to metastatic breast cancer. 12Years after first primary tumor diagnosis. A case report.

IntroductionMetastatic adenocarcinoma to the appendix is an uncommon finding, there are few published cases in the literature of appendicitis from metastatic breast carcinoma.Presentation of caseA 51-year-old female was admitted to the emergency department with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis with a past medical history of stage IV Breast Cancer 12 years ago. Appendectomy was performed, finding a perforated appendix. Anatomo-pathology examination revealed a semi-differentiated carcinoma involving the tip of the appendix.DiscussionGastrointestinal tract (GIT) metastases of breast carcinoma are an uncommon finding. Appendiceal metastases are a very uncommon finding, and the interval between diagnosis of the primary carcinoma and the metastases can be many years. There are no reports about whether right hemicolectomy provides better oncological outcomes than an appendectomy in stage IV BC.ConclusionThere are no guidelines for the management of this disease but unquestionably, multidisciplinary management leads to better outcomes.

Management of acute abdomen during the active disease course of COVID-19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children.

PurposeTo evaluate the management of children with severe gastrointestinal symptoms during the disease course of COVID-19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C).MethodsAfter ethical approval, we reviewed the medical records, retrospectively, of children with COVID-19 or MIS-C requiring surgical consultation for severe gastrointestinal symptoms.ResultsThe subjects comprised 15 children, 13 with MIS-C and 2 with COVID-19. Twelve children (80%) had been in known close contact with a person with SARS-CoV-19 and 13 were positive for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG. All the children had experienced fever for at least 1 day and had signs of involvement of two or more systems. Three patients required surgical intervention: one underwent surgical exploration with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the referring center and was transported to our center following clinical deterioration, where a diagnosis of MIS-C was confirmed; and the remaining two developed appendicitis during hospitalization for COVID-19. All three patients had a longer duration of abdominal pain, a higher number of lymphocytes, and a lower level of inflammatory markers than the non-surgically managed patients. None of the patients presenting with MIS-C underwent surgical exploration.ConclusionGastrointestinal involvement may mimic acute abdomen in children with COVID-19. Thus, children presenting with acute abdomen in the pandemic era require careful evaluation and prompt diagnosis to avoid unnecessary surgical intervention.

EP.FRI.247 Incidence and diversity of the primary appendiceal tumours in patients presenting with acute appendicitis: Our Experience

Abstract Background Primary appendiceal tumours are rare. Our experience with the incidental primary appendiceal tumours and their histological diversity. Patients and Method Operative and pathological databases of appendicectomies for presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis between January 2015 and December 2020 were interrogated. Clinicopathological data were collected and analysed to present the incidence of primary appendiceal tumours, histopathological diversity and outcomes. Results 1908 appendicectomies were performed over the study period. 22 patients with primary appendiceal tumours (incidence rate 1.2%) had a mean age of 45.6(15-97) years and M:F ratio of 1:1.2. Only six patients (27.3%) had appendiceal tumour suspected either before or during surgery. 91% of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy. Right hemicolectomy was performed as the first intervention and further surgical procedure in 1 and 5 patients respectively. Histological tumour types included carcinoid(10), adenocarcinoma(4), low grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm(4) mucinous adenocarcinoma &amp; carcinoid(1), goblet cell carcinoid(2) and dysplastic serrated polyp(1). Tumours were located at the tip(10), body(10) and base(2). Median tumour size was 13(2.0-55.0) mm. Median hospital stay was 1.5(0-25) days. The mean survival was 30.9(2.80-73.70) months. Disease related death was a 97-year-old lady with a T4 adenocarcinoma and peritoneal disease who stayed for 25 days and offered palliative supports post appendicectomy. Conclusion Primary appendiceal tumours are diverse in histological types and are of varying prognosis. Appendicectomy alone seemed to be adequate in most cases with early-stage disease. Further surgery such as right hemicolectomy was required for adenocarcinoma and other high-grade tumours.

Paediatric appendiceal neuroendocrine tumours: a review of 33 cases from a single center

Appendiceal neurendocrine tumours (NETs) are rare neoplasms and diagnosis is commonly incidental following appendectomy. We aimed to review our experience with appendiceal NETs. Records of children with appendiceal NETs were reviewed and data concerning demographic characteristics, clinical findings, surgical procedures, histopathological findings, management and outcomes were recorded. Between 1985 and 2021, 33 cases with appendiceal NETs (median age 11.8 years, range 7.8-16; male/female=10/23) were identified. All but one patients presented with abdominal pain, six had vomiting, four had fever and they underwent appendectomies with presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Abscess drainage and appendectomy was performed in a 16-year-old girl for suspected right ovarian mass, and tumour was positive in the omentum. Histopathological diagnosis was classical carcinoid tumour (NET) in all cases. Median tumour size was 0.9cm (n=26, range, 0.1-3.5cm); tumours were ≤1cm in 19 cases, 2cm in one, 3.5cm in another case. Tumours were located in the tip (n=11), body (n=6) and base of appendix (n=1) (in others data unavailable). In 28 patients with data, tumour extended to submucosa in five, to tunica muscularis in seven, to subserosa in six, to serosa in six, to mesoappendix in three, to periappendiceal fat in one. Three cases were lost to follow-up, 31 cases were alive (median follow-up 53 months). Paediatric appendiceal NETs do not behave aggressively and appendectomy alone is sufficient for tumours ≤2cm regardless of local invasion. The need for further extensive surgery in tumours >2cm also remains controversial.

Unusual infectious agents detected in appendectomy specimens: A retrospective analysis of 42 cases.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and histopathological features of 42 patients with unusual infectious agents detected in their appendectomy specimens. Between January 1999 and November 2018, 2.754 patients underwent emergency or incidental appendectomy in our clinic, and their pathology reports were retrospectively reviewed. Unusual infectious agents or eosinophilic infiltration of the appendix were reported in the initial pathological examinations of 57 patients. The pathological slides of these patients were re-examined by histopathologists. The examinations revealed that 15 of these patients had no microscopic findings suggestive of parasitic infections. The remaining 42 patients with unusual appendiceal infectious agents were included into the study. A total of 42 patients (25 females and 17 males) aged 18 to 75 years were included into this study. While 32 of these patients (76%) underwent emergency appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AAp), the remaining 10 patients underwent incidental appendectomy for various reasons. Twenty-two patients (52.4%) had histopathological changes consistent with AAp while 20 patients had no evidence of AAp. Histopathological examination revealed infection with Enterobius vermicularis in 38 of the patients, Taenia species in 2, and Ascaris lumbricoides and Actinomyces species in 1 patient each. A total of 24 patients were treated for infections with mebendazole (n = 20), albendazole (n =1), niclosamide (n = 2), and amoxicillin (n = 1). Unusual infectious agents should be considered as factors potentially triggering AAp, especially in patients living in endemic areas. The appendiceal stump should be inspected for parasite residues.

“Tethered Fat Sign”: The Sonographic Sign of Omental Infarction

Our purpose is to describe the ultrasound sign for a correct non-invasive diagnosis of omental infarction in children. From January 2014 to December 2018, a total of 234 children (109 boys and 125 girls, age range 3–15 y) with acute right-sided abdominal pain, admitted to our hospital with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis, were prospectively evaluated. In all patients, abdominal ultrasound was performed, and the omental fat was always evaluated. In 228 patients, the omental fat resulted to be normal or hyperechogenic, never tethered, and they results affected by other causes of abdominal pain different from omental infarction (such as appendicitis, pancreatitis, urolithiasis and others). In the remaining 6 children, we found a hyperechoic mass between the anterior abdominal wall and the ascending or transverse colon in the right abdomen quadrant, suggesting the diagnosis of omental infarction. This subhepatic mass was always tethered to the abdominal wall, motionless during respiratory excursions. We named this finding the “tethered fat sign.” The diagnosis was confirmed with laparoscopy in 4 children. The other 2 children were treated with conservative therapy. In these 2 patients, a sonographic follow-up was performed, showing a progressive reduction in size of the right-sided hyperechoic mass. In conclusion, our study suggests that the presence of the “tethered fat sign” may be an accurate sonographic sign for non-invasive diagnosis of omental infarction in children.

Liver transplant versus non-liver transplant patients underwent appendectomy with presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis: Case-control study.

This study aims to compare liver transplant and non-liver transplant patients who underwent appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Demographic and clinicopathological features of 13 liver transplant recipients (transplant group) who underwent posttransplant appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis were compared with the features of 52 non-liver transplant patients (non-transplant group). They underwent appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis during the same time period. The transplant group was matched at random in a 1: 4 ratio with the non- transplant group. While the continuous variables were compared using the Mann Whitney-U test, categorical variables were compared with Fisher's exact test. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 65 patients aged between one year and 84 years were included in this study. While the age of the 52 patients (32 male and 20 female) in the non- transplant group ranged from 17 years to 84 years, the age of the 13 patients (nine male and four female) in the transplant group ranged from one year to 64 years. Statistically significant differences were noted between both groups concerning WBC (p=0.002), neutrophil (p=0.002), lymphocyte (p=0.032), platelets (p=0.032), RDW (p=0.001), CRP (p=0.009), PNR (p=0.042), WNR (p=0.03), and appendiceal length (p<0.001). The negative appendectomy rate was relatively higher in transplant than the non-transplant group but this difference was not statistically significant (30.8% vs. 21.2%; p=0.477). Perforated acute appendicitis occurred more frequently in the transplant group; however, this difference was not statistically significant (30.8% vs. 9.6%; p=0.070). WBC and neutrophil were lower in the LT group; however, the CRP and RDW were higher in the LT group. Further, perforation and negative appendectomy rates were higher in the LT group, although this difference was not statistically significant.

Assessment of demographic, clinical and histopathological features of patients who underwent appendectomy due to a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

To compare the clinical, biochemical, and histopathological features of patients who underwent appendectomy due to a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AAp). The demographic, biochemical and histopathological data of 8206 patients who underwent appendectomy for AAp between January 2006 and March 2014 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Patients were compared regarding the following characteristics: disruption by season (autumn vs. winter vs. spring vs. summer), working days (weekdays vs. weekends), histopathological findings (AAp vs. normal appendix [NAp]) and histopathological subgroup (non-perforated AAp vs. perforated AAp vs. NAp). Of the 8206 patients aged between 16 and 89 years, 4763 (58.0%) were male. Appendectomy distribution by season was as follows: autumn (n=1959; 23.9%), winter (n=2062; 25.1%), spring (n=2061; 25.1%) and summer (n=2124, 25.9%). NAp rates were higher in summer than those in other seasons. White blood cell (WBC) and neutrophil levels were significantly higher in autumn and winter compared with those in other seasons. In total, 6120 (74.6%) appendectomies occurred on weekdays and 2086 (25.4%) on weekends. WBC and neutrophil levels were significantly higher on weekends than those on weekdays. Appendectomy distribution by histopathological groups as follows: AAp (n=7414; 90.3%) and NAp (n=792; 9.7%). Appendectomy distribution by histopathological subgroups was as follows: non-perforated AAp (n=6966; 84.9%), perforated AAp (n=448; 5.5%), and NAp (n=792; 9.7%). WBC, neutrophil, and TBil levels in the non-perforated and perforated AAp groups were significantly higher than in the NAp group. While most of the patients with perforated AAp (62.1%) and non-perforated AAp (59.6%) were males, most of the patients with NAp (58.1%) were females. This study suggests that a relationship exists between demographic features, histopathological findings of appendectomy specimens, seasons, days of the week, and working days in patients undergoing appendectomy.

Comparison of the demographic and clinical features of pregnant and non-pregnant patients undergoing appendectomy.

This retrospective study aims to compare the demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the pregnant and non-pregnant patients who underwent appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Between June 2009 and January 2019, 431 reproductive-aged of female patients underwent appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Patients were divided into two groups considering their pregnancy status: pregnant group (n=48) and non-pregnant group (n=383). Both groups were compared with respect to demographic, clinical and histopathological features. No statistically significant difference was found between pregnant and non-pregnant groups except total bilirubin level (p=0.019) and ultrasonographic findings (p=0.016). In the non-pregnant group, negative appendectomy and perforation rates were 26% and 10.5%, where these rates for the pregnant group were 20.8% and 4.2%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy rates of ultrasonography for the pregnant group were 50%, 100% and 58.5%, where these rates for the non-pregnant group were 67.3%, 57.9% and 65%. The pregnancy date was the first trimester in 52.1%, the second trimester in 29.2% and the third trimester in 16.7% of the pregnants. None of the term births (87.5%) resulted in neither a fetal nor a maternal complication. However, 12.5% of the preterm births resulted in neonatal mortality. Although not statistically significant, this study points out relatively lower rates of negative appendectomy and perforated acute appendicitis among pregnant patients, which is related to the overly attentive evaluation of pregnants admitted due to acute abdomen.

Does alvarado score reduce the need for ultrasonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis?

We aimed to evaluate the correlation between Alvarado scoring and ultrasonographic findings in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and its role in reduction of the rate of negative appendectomy. A total of 2772 patients operated between January 2010 and September 2016 with the presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with appendicitis detected in histopathologic examination were assessed as Group 1, and those with no appendicitis detected were assessed as Group 2. The rate of negative appendectomy was 5.3%. Alvarado score was ≥7 in 2226 and <7 in 399 patients in Group 1. Alvarado score was ≥7 in 92 and < 7 in 55 patients in Group 2 (P < 0.0001). Among the patients with acute appendicitis identified in histopathologic examination, USG revealed acute appendicitis in 1804 and no acute appendicitis in 422 of the patients with an Alvarado score >7. Among the patients without acute appendicitis in histopathologic examination, USG revealed acute appendicitis in 74 and no acute appendicitis in 18 of the patients with an Alvarado score >7, while acute appendicitis was detected in USG in 29 and was not detected in 26 of the patients with an Alvarado score <7. While possibility of correct diagnosis is high in patients with an Alvarado score ≥7, the diagnosis should not be ruled out in patients with a low Alvarado score. Instead of using alone, the use of Alvarado scoring and ultrasonography together could reduce the rate of negative appendectomy and increase specificity.

Differential diagnosis of the granulomatous appendicitis: Retrospective analysis of 16 cases.

This study aims to present the usability of real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) in the differential diagnosis of granulomatous appendicitis (GAp), especially in areas where tuberculosis (TB) is endemic. Sixteen patients underwent appendectomy with presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis were retrospectively analyzed for histopathological diagnosis of GAp. Real-time PCR method was used to show the whether presence of DNA of the tubercle bacilli in paraffin-embedded tissue blocks. IGRA test was used to investigate whether tubercle bacilli- specific interferon gamma was present in peripheral blood. Sixteen patients (male: 10 female: 6) aged between 21 and 82 years were included in this study. All patients had acute appendicitis and three of them also had appendiceal perforation. Histopathologically, necrotizing granulomatous inflammation was detected in all appendectomy specimens. Acid-fast bacilli were not detected in any of the pathology slides stained with Ehrlich-Ziehl-Neelsen. Real-time PCR was studied in paraffin-embedded tissue blocks of all patients with GAp, but the TB bacilli DNA was amplified in only three patients. IGRA test was studied in peripheral blood samples of 12 patients with GAp and results were as follows: negative (n=9), positive (n=2) and indeterminate (n=1). We believe that the use of anamnesis, histopathological findings, tissue PCR, blood IGRA and clinical findings together are important for differential diagnosis of GAp, especially where TB is endemic. We also suggest that all appendectomy specimens should be sent to the laboratory for histopathological evaluation even if specimens appear macroscopically normal.

An investigation into the factors predicting acute appendicitis and perforated appendicitis.

To investigate the factors predicting acute appendicitis (AAp) and perforated AAp in patients who underwent surgery with a preliminary diagnosis of AAp. Between May 2009 and December 2018, 1316 patients underwent appendectomy with a presumed diagnosis of AAp. To investigate the factors predicting AAp, patients were divided into two groups considering the histopathological presence of inflammatory changes in the appendix: AAp positive (AAp group; n=1043) and AAp negative (Non-AAp group; n=273). Also, to investigate the factors predicting appendiceal perforation, patients with AAp were divided into two groups considering the presence of perforation: non-perforated AAp (n=850) and perforated AAp (n=193). ROC curve analysis was used to identify optimum cut-off values of quantitative variables. The groups were compared using univariate analysis methods and parameters with a p≤ 0.20 were taken into a multivariate logistic regression model. Multivariate analysis method related to factors predicting AAp showed that gender (male; p=0.034; OR=1.4), WBC (≥10.900; p=0.022; OR=1.5), MPV (≥29.1; p=0.006; OR=1.6), TBil (≥0.61; p=0.034; OR=1.4), CRP (≥0.725; p=0.002; OR=1.7), NLR (≥5.13; p=0.034; OR=1.5), PNR (<24.04; p=0.001; OR=1.9) and US findings (AAp+; p<0.001; OR=2.9) were independent factors for predicting AAp. Multivariate analysis method related to factors predicting appendiceal perforation showed that age (≥32 years; p<0.001; OR=2.5), TBil (≥0.67; p=0.046; OR=1.5), CRP (≥3.75; p<0.001; OR=3.0) and NLR (≥5.69; p=0.006; OR=1.8) were independent factors for predicting perforated AAp. We believe that predicting both AAp and perforation will help the clinician evaluate patients who applied to the emergency unit with presumed diagnosis AAp. This approach will also contribute to reducing the negative appendectomy and perforation rates.

Does it matter if it is appendix mucocele instead of appendicitis? Case series and brief review of literature.

Appendiceal mucocele (AM) is a rare pathology, and its reported incidence is 0.3% in all appendectomy specimens. Here, we report a case series of AM and make a brief review of literature. We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively collected data of patients who diagnosed as AM by histopathological evaluation between January 2009 and June 2015 were demographic data including age and gender, intraoperative findings, and histopathological reports were recorded. All cases were followed-up by routine examination and telephone interview. Definitive statistical methods (mean, standard deviation, median, frequency, and percentage) were used to evaluate the study data. Twelve patients were examined in the study with diagnose of AM. The mean age was 51.8 ± 18.6 years (26-83). Female-to-male ratio was 1.4 (7/5). Indications for surgery were acute abdomen in 8 (72.7%) patients with presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis and were AM in four patients diagnosed by imaging. Histopathological evaluation revealed mucinous cystadenoma in eight patients, simple retention cysts in three, and borderline mucinous tumor (pseudomyxoma peritonei) in one. The neuroendocrine tumor was obtained on the remaining portion of the appendix in one of the simple retention cysts patients. None of the patients died because of the AM with an average follow-up of 43 months (range: 7-74). Surgical resection is the first choice therapy for AM. Precise treatment modality can remain unclear in some patients because of insufficient preoperative diagnosis. It is nonmalign AM mostly however having mucocele matters because of the significant association with synchronous tumors.