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

INTRODUCTION: Recent 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. METHODS: Clinical 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. RESULTS: 18.2% 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. CONCLUSION: Low 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.

COVID-19 infection risk by open and laparoscopic surgical smoke: A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The current COVID-19 pandemic has greatly changed the way surgery is delivered. In particular, current guidelines and policies have highlighted the need to use high level Personal Protective Equipment to reduce the risk of viral infection during open and laparoscopic surgical procedures. In particular, it was felt that the laparoscopic approach was at higher risk of viral transmission due to the chimney effect of the smoke escape from the trocars during and after the procedure. However, with this being a new and largely unknown viral agent, guidelines have been based on speculation and extrapolation from previous studies conducted in completely different situations, and led to anxiety amongst surgeons and theatre staff. We decided to conduct a systematic review of the Literature to try to clarify whether inhalation of surgical smoke can increase the risk of COVID-19 infection. METHODS: A thorough search of the relevant Literature was performed following the PRISMA guidelines and the most relevant papers on this topic were selected for qualitative analysis. Duplicates, review, personal opinions and guidelines have been excluded. Quantitative analysis has not been performed due to the lack of homogeneous high-quality studies. RESULTS: Literature search identified 740 papers but only 34 of them were suitable for qualitative analysis. The quality of those studies is generally quite low. We were not able to find any evidence directly linking surgical smoke with viral transmission, other than in patients with active HPV infection. DISCUSSION: Inhalation of surgical smoke can be generally hazardous, and therefore the use of PPE during surgical operations must be recommended in any case. However, the present systematic review of the existent Literature did not identify any significant evidence of the risk of viral transmission with the surgical smoke, therefore the current guidelines restricting the use of laparoscopy and/or diathermy during the current Covid-19 pandemic may be considered excessive and non-evidence based.