The contemporary management of perforated appendicitis in adults: To operate or wait?

IF 1.4 Q3 SURGERY Surgery open science Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.sopen.2024.07.008
Caitlin A. Fitzgerald MD , Caroline Kernell BS , Valeria Mejia-Martinez BS , Giselle Peng BS , Heba Zakaria BS , Michelle Zhu BS , Dale Butler MD , Brandon Bruns MD, MBA
{"title":"The contemporary management of perforated appendicitis in adults: To operate or wait?","authors":"Caitlin A. Fitzgerald MD ,&nbsp;Caroline Kernell BS ,&nbsp;Valeria Mejia-Martinez BS ,&nbsp;Giselle Peng BS ,&nbsp;Heba Zakaria BS ,&nbsp;Michelle Zhu BS ,&nbsp;Dale Butler MD ,&nbsp;Brandon Bruns MD, MBA","doi":"10.1016/j.sopen.2024.07.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The optimal management of perforated appendicitis remains controversial. Many studies advocate for antibiotics and an interval appendectomy whereas others suggest that performing an appendectomy at the time of presentation decreases post-operative morbidity. Confounding this argument further are the patients who fail non-operative management and end up requiring surgery during their initial hospitalization. This study aims to determine if early operative intervention should be considered for perforated appendicitis.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent an appendectomy (both laparoscopic or open) for perforated appendicitis between 2015 and 2020 at our institution.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 271 patients met inclusion criteria for this study. Of this group, 250 patients underwent an immediate appendectomy whereas the remaining 21 patients underwent a trial of non-operative management and eventually required an appendectomy during their initial admission. When comparing the immediate versus delayed operative groups, there were no differences in demographic data including age and gender, and no differences in various imaging findings including AAST Grade IV or V appendicitis. Operatively, patients in the delayed group had a longer operative time (83.1 ± 32.9 vs. 64.1 ± 26.2, <em>p</em> = 0.01), were more likely to require an open operation (23.8 % vs. 2.8 %, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.0001), and were more likely to have a drain placed intra-operatively (42.9 % vs 14.4 %, <em>p</em> = 0.004). While there were no differences in 30-day readmission rates, patients in the delayed group had a significantly longer hospital length of stay than patients in the immediate group (9.4 ± 7.4 vs. 3.1 ± 3.3, <em>p</em> = 0.008).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients undergoing an immediate appendectomy for perforated appendicitis can discharge from the hospital sooner and demonstrate no increase in post-operative morbidity suggesting that surgeons can initially manage this disease process in an operative fashion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74892,"journal":{"name":"Surgery open science","volume":"20 ","pages":"Pages 242-246"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589845024001052/pdfft?md5=657efceb1c297f7262f0371da08ba08e&pid=1-s2.0-S2589845024001052-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery open science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589845024001052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The optimal management of perforated appendicitis remains controversial. Many studies advocate for antibiotics and an interval appendectomy whereas others suggest that performing an appendectomy at the time of presentation decreases post-operative morbidity. Confounding this argument further are the patients who fail non-operative management and end up requiring surgery during their initial hospitalization. This study aims to determine if early operative intervention should be considered for perforated appendicitis.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent an appendectomy (both laparoscopic or open) for perforated appendicitis between 2015 and 2020 at our institution.

Results

A total of 271 patients met inclusion criteria for this study. Of this group, 250 patients underwent an immediate appendectomy whereas the remaining 21 patients underwent a trial of non-operative management and eventually required an appendectomy during their initial admission. When comparing the immediate versus delayed operative groups, there were no differences in demographic data including age and gender, and no differences in various imaging findings including AAST Grade IV or V appendicitis. Operatively, patients in the delayed group had a longer operative time (83.1 ± 32.9 vs. 64.1 ± 26.2, p = 0.01), were more likely to require an open operation (23.8 % vs. 2.8 %, p < 0.0001), and were more likely to have a drain placed intra-operatively (42.9 % vs 14.4 %, p = 0.004). While there were no differences in 30-day readmission rates, patients in the delayed group had a significantly longer hospital length of stay than patients in the immediate group (9.4 ± 7.4 vs. 3.1 ± 3.3, p = 0.008).

Conclusions

Patients undergoing an immediate appendectomy for perforated appendicitis can discharge from the hospital sooner and demonstrate no increase in post-operative morbidity suggesting that surgeons can initially manage this disease process in an operative fashion.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成人穿孔性阑尾炎的现代治疗方法:手术还是等待?
目标穿孔性阑尾炎的最佳治疗方法仍存在争议。许多研究主张使用抗生素并进行间隔性阑尾切除术,而另一些研究则认为在患者发病时进行阑尾切除术可降低术后发病率。非手术治疗失败并最终需要在最初住院期间进行手术的患者进一步加剧了这一争论。本研究旨在确定是否应考虑对穿孔性阑尾炎进行早期手术干预。方法这是一项回顾性研究,研究对象为2015年至2020年间在我院因穿孔性阑尾炎接受阑尾切除术(腹腔镜或开腹)的所有患者。其中,250 名患者立即进行了阑尾切除术,而其余 21 名患者在入院初期接受了非手术治疗试验,最终需要进行阑尾切除术。在比较立即手术组和延迟手术组时,人口统计学数据(包括年龄和性别)没有差异,各种影像学检查结果(包括 AAST IV 级或 V 级阑尾炎)也没有差异。手术方面,延迟手术组患者的手术时间更长(83.1 ± 32.9 vs. 64.1 ± 26.2,p = 0.01),更有可能需要开腹手术(23.8 % vs. 2.8 %,p < 0.0001),更有可能在术中放置引流管(42.9 % vs. 14.4 %,p = 0.004)。结论因阑尾炎穿孔而立即接受阑尾切除术的患者可以更快出院,术后发病率也没有增加,这表明外科医生最初可以通过手术来处理这种疾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
期刊最新文献
Management of Colorectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: A systematic review of national and International Clinical Guidelines (CoSMIC-G) Primary delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy: A matched-pair comparison of Roux-en-Y vs. Billroth-II reconstruction Immersive collaborative virtual reality for case-based graduate student teaching in thoracic surgery: A piloting study Engagement and learning approaches among medical students in an online surgical teaching programme: A cross-sectional study Gender and age specific dynamics of health-related postoperative outcome measures following the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1