Covid-19 Pandemic Strategy for Treatment of Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis with Antibiotics- Risk Categorization and Shared Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a protocol was adopted by our department on antibiotics treatment for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis (AUA). Our study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of non-operative treatment (NOT), compared to upfront laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), for AUA in children during the pandemic. METHOD: Our prospective comparative study was conducted from May 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021. Patient selection criteria included: age ≥5 years, abdominal pain duration ≤48 h, ultrasound (US)/Computered Tomography scan confirmation of AUA, US appendiceal diameter 6-11 mm with no features of perforation/abscess collection and no faecolith. For NOT patients, intravenous antibiotics were administered for 24-48 h followed by oral for 10-day course. Comparison was performed between patients whose parents preferred NOT to those who opted for up-front appendectomy. Primary outcomes were NOT success at index admission, early and late NOT failure rates till 27 months. Secondary outcomes were differences in complication rate, hospital length of stay (LOS) and cost between groups. RESULTS: 77 patients were recruited: 43 (55.8%) underwent NOT while 34 (44.2%) patients opted for LA. Success of NOT at index admission was 90.7% (39/43). Overall, NOT failure rate at 27 months' follow-up was 37.2% (16/43). Of the NOT failures, 1 appendix was normal on histology while only 1 was perforated. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes between both groups except for LOS of late NOT failure. Cost for upfront LA was nearly thrice that of NOT. CONCLUSION: Our stringent COVID protocol together with shared decision-making with parents is a safe and feasible treatment option during a crisis situation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment study, Level II.

Conservative antibiotic treatment of pediatric acute uncomplicated appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic: a prospective comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Our study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and cost-efficiency of antibiotic management versus laparoscopic appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA) in children during the COVID-19 pandemic when resources were limited and transmission risks uncertain. METHOD: In this prospective comparative cohort study, we analyzed the data of 139 children diagnosed with AUA meeting the following inclusion criteria: 5-18 years of age, symptoms duration of ≤ 48 h, appendix diameter ≤ 11 mm and no appendicolith. Treatment outcomes between non-operative management group (78/139) and upfront laparoscopic appendectomy group (61/139) were compared. Antibiotic regimes were intravenous ceftriaxone/metronidazole or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid for 48 h, followed by oral antibiotics to complete total 10-days course. RESULTS: 8/78 (10.3%) children had early failure (within 48 h) requiring appendectomy. 17/70 (24.3%) patients experienced late recurrence within mean follow-up time of 16.2 ± 4.7 months. There were no statistical differences in peri-operative complications, negative appendicectomy rate, and incidence of perforation and hospitalization duration between antibiotic and surgical treatment groups. Cost per patient in upfront surgical group was significantly higher ($6208.5 ± 5284.0) than antibiotic group ($3588.6 ± 3829.8; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite 24.3% risk of recurrence of appendicitis in 16.2 ± 4.7 months, antibiotic therapy for AUA appears to be a safe and cost-effective alternative to upfront appendectomy.

Is it time for global adoption of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy of acute appendicitis?

Acute appendicitis is a common abdominal surgical emergency worldwide. Abraham Groves performed the first documented open appendectomy in 1883. Although appendectomy is still the most effective treatment in cases of acute appendicitis, it causes a range of complications and carries the risk of negative appendectomy. In the awake of covid-19, the latest guidelines recommend antibiotic therapy as an acceptable first line treatment for acute appendicitis. However, patients treated with antibiotics have a recurrence risk of up to 30% at 1 year. Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) has emerged as promising non-invasive treatment modality for acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA) which involves cannulation, appedicography, appendiceal stone extraction, appendiceal lumen irrigation, and stent insertion. ERAT aims to relieve the cause of appendicitis (e.g., obstruction or stenosis of the appendiceal lumen) and thus effectively prevent the recurrence of appendicitis. In addition, it can make a definitive diagnosis of acute appendicitis during endoscopic retrograde appendicography. Studies have shown that 93.8 to 95% of AUA patients did not have a recurrence following ERAT. In this study, we aim to summarize the current body of evidence on ERAT to situate it alongside currently established therapies for acute appendicitis, in particular, AUA.

Management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic: Appendectomy or non-surgical treatment?

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare medical treatment and appendectomy in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Retrospectively analyzed were the data of 80 patients who received medical or surgical treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis between March 15, 2020, and August 31, 2020. The demographic characteristics of the patients, length of hospital stay, physical examination and radiology findings, laboratory results, and any complications were recorded. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the mode of treatment, as surgical and non-surgical. RESULTS: Forty patients were given medical treatment and 40 patients were directly operated on for appendicitis. Of the 40 patients who received medical treatment, 8 (20%) ended up requiring an operation due to recurrence. The mean duration of hospitalization was 2 days (range: 1-3), and the mean follow-up duration was 285.35±65.66 days (range: 101-379). The white blood cell count was significantly higher in the surgical group (p=0.004), and the length of hospital stay was longer in the non-surgical group (p<0.001). The prevalence of post-operative complications was similar for patients who underwent appendectomy directly on admission or after recurrence (p=1.000). Among the patients who received medical treatment, the most important predictors of requiring surgery were the red cell distribution width and increased appendix diameter in computed tomography (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Medical treatment is an effective alternative in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. Even in the case of a recurrence in follow-up, surgery due to a potential recurrence is not associated with an increased rate of complication compared to direct surgery.

Changes in appendicitis treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 a decrease of emergency consultations and modification in treatment of numerous medical conditions were observed. Aim of this paper was to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on incidence, treatment strategies, severity, length of hospital stay and time of presentation in adults and children with acute appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic literature search of Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed, and eligible studies used to perform a meta-analysis. RESULTS: 46 suitable studies were identified with an overall reduction of appendicitis cases by 20.9% in adults and an increase of 13.4% in children. The rate of open appendectomies increased without statistical significance in both groups (adults: 8.5% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.32; children: 7.1% vs. 5.3%, P = 0.13), whereas the rate of antibiotic treatment increased significantly (P = 0.007; P = 0.03). Higher rates of complicated appendicitis were observed in adults (adults: OR 2.00, P < 0.0001; children: OR 1.64, P = 0.12). Time to first consultation did not change significantly (adults: 52.3 vs. 38.5 h - P = 0.057; children: 51.5 vs. 32.0 h - P = 0.062) and length of stay was also not lengthened during the pandemic (adults: 2.9 vs. 2.7 days, P = 0.057; children: 4.2 vs. 3.7 days, P = 0.062). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 had major impact on incidence and treatment strategies of acute appendicitis. Results of this meta-analysis might be another hint to support the theory that appendicitis is not a progressive disease and surgeons can safely consider antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis.

Where have all the appendicectomies gone?

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic stimulated a national lockdown in the UK. The public were advised to avoid unnecessary hospital attendances and health professionals were advised to avoid aerosol-generating procedures wherever possible. The authors hypothesised that these measures would result in a reduction in the number of patients presenting to hospital with acute appendicitis and alter treatment choices. METHODS: A multicentred, prospective observational study was undertaken during April 2020 to identify adults treated for acute appendicitis. Searches of operative and radiological records were performed to identify patients treated during April 2018 and April 2019 for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were treated for acute appendicitis pre-lockdown compared with 64 patients treated during lockdown. Patients treated during the pandemic were more likely to have a higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score (p = 0.049) and to have delayed their presentation to hospital (2 versus 3 days, p = 0.03). During the lockdown, the use of computed tomography (CT) increased from 36.3% to 85.9% (p < 0.001), the use of an antibiotic-only approach increased from 6.2% to 40.6% (p < 0.001) and the rate of laparoscopic appendicectomy reduced from 85.3% to 17.2% (p < 0.001). The negative appendicectomy rate decreased from 21.7% to 7.1% during lockdown (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 lockdown was associated with a decreased incidence of acute appendicitis and a significant shift in the management approach. The increased use of CT allows the identification of simple appendicitis for conservative treatment and decreases the negative appendicectomy rate.

Acute appendicitis management during the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective cohort study from a large UK centre.

BACKGROUND: During the Covid-19 pandemic, non-operative management for acute appendicitis (AA) was implemented in the UK. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and outcomes of conservative versus surgical management of AA during the pandemic. MATERIALS & METHODS: We conducted an observational study in a tertiary referral centre. Data was collected from all patients (≥16 years) with a diagnosis of AA between November 1, 2019 to March 10, 2020 (pre-COVID period) and March 10, 2020 to July 5, 2020 (COVID period). RESULTS: A total of 116 patients in the pre-COVID period were included versus 91 in the COVID period. 43.1% (n = 50) of patients pre-COVID were classified as ASA 2 compared to 26.4% (n = 24) during the COVID period (p-value = 0.042). 72.5% (n = 66) of the patients during the COVID period scored as high risk using the Alvarado score compared to 24.1% (n = 28) in the pre-COVID period (p-value<0.001). We observed a significant increase in radiological evaluation, 69.8% versus 87.5% of patients had a CT in the pre-COVID and COVID periods respectively (p-value = 0.008). 94.9% of patients were managed operatively in the pre-COVID period compared to 60.4% in the COVID period (p-value<0.001). We observed more open appendicectomies (37.3% versus 0.9%; p-value<0.001) during the COVID period compared to the pre-COVID period. More abscess formation and free fluid were found intraoperatively in the COVID period (p-value = 0.021 and 0.023 respectively). Re-attendance rate due to appendicitis-related issues was significantly higher in the COVID period (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Radiological diagnosis of AA was more frequent during the COVID period. More conservative management for AA was employed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and for those managed operatively an open approach was preferred. Intra-operative findings were suggestive of delayed presentation during the COVID period without this affecting the length of hospital stay.

Long-term effects of appendectomy in humans: is it the optimal management of appendicitis?

INTRODUCTION: Appendectomy remains the gold standard for treating uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. However, the vermiform appendix may play a significant role in the immune system (secondary immune function) and maintain a reservoir of the normal microbiome for the human body. The aim of this study was to summarize the long-term effects after appendectomy and discuss whether appendectomy is suitable for all appendicitis patients. AREAS COVERED: A comprehensive and unbiased literature search was performed in PubMed. The terms 'appendix,' 'appendicitis,' 'appendectomy,' and 'endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy' were searched in the title and/or abstract. This review summarizes the long-term effects of appendectomy on some diseases in humans and describes three methods including appendectomy, medical treatment, and an 'organ-sparing' technique, named endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) to treat appendicitis. EXPERT OPINION: Appendectomy remains the first-line therapy for appendicitis. The patient's problem is appendix, not appendicitis. If we treat appendicitis, the problem should be resolved. During COVID-19, an initial antibiotic treatment of mild appendicitis represents a promising strategy. For patients who are worried about the long-term adverse effect after appendectomy and have a strong desire to preserve the appendix and are aware of the risk of appendicitis recurrence, medical treatment, or ERAT could be proposed.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Antibiotics with Appendectomy for Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic therapy has been proposed as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of appendicitis. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, nonblinded, noninferiority, randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy (10-day course) with appendectomy in patients with appendicitis at 25 U.S. centers. The primary outcome was 30-day health status, as assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better health status; noninferiority margin, 0.05 points). Secondary outcomes included appendectomy in the antibiotics group and complications through 90 days; analyses were prespecified in subgroups defined according to the presence or absence of an appendicolith. RESULTS: In total, 1552 adults (414 with an appendicolith) underwent randomization; 776 were assigned to receive antibiotics (47% of whom were not hospitalized for the index treatment) and 776 to undergo appendectomy (96% of whom underwent a laparoscopic procedure). Antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of 30-day EQ-5D scores (mean difference, 0.01 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.001 to 0.03). In the antibiotics group, 29% had undergone appendectomy by 90 days, including 41% of those with an appendicolith and 25% of those without an appendicolith. Complications were more common in the antibiotics group than in the appendectomy group (8.1 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.98); the higher rate in the antibiotics group could be attributed to those with an appendicolith (20.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.11 to 15.38) and not to those without an appendicolith (3.7 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.43). The rate of serious adverse events was 4.0 per 100 participants in the antibiotics group and 3.0 per 100 participants in the appendectomy group (rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.50). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of results of a standard health-status measure. In the antibiotics group, nearly 3 in 10 participants had undergone appendectomy by 90 days. Participants with an appendicolith were at a higher risk for appendectomy and for complications than those without an appendicolith. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; CODA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02800785.).

Limiting hospital resources for acute appendicitis in children: Lessons learned from the U.S. epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the suspension of nonemergent surgeries throughout New York. Our tertiary care children's hospital pivoted towards a brief trial of intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy in all patients in order to limit operating room (OR) utilization and avoid prolonged hospital stays. We describe our pandemic-based strategy for non-operative management (NOM) of appendicitis but with a limited duration of IV antibiotics. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of children treated for acute appendicitis at our center from 3/31/2020 to 5/3/2020 during the peak of the New York pandemic. We compared appendicitis volume to similar months in prior years. We evaluated failure of NOM, length of stay, and compared characteristics of children we successfully treated with our expanded NOM protocol to previously published inclusion criteria for NOM. RESULTS: 45.5% of children (25/55) with acute appendicitis underwent NOM. Of the 30 who underwent surgery, 13 had complicated appendicitis while 17 had simple appendicitis. Three patients were COVID-positive, although none had respiratory symptoms. The majority of patients presenting with acute appendicitis (78.2%) did not meet previously published criteria for NOM. CONCLUSIONS: We treated a similar volume of children with acute appendicitis during the pandemic compared to prior years. We applied non-operative management to nearly half our patients, even as we expanded inclusion criteria for NOM to reduce OR utilization, but limited the duration of the antibiotic trial to avoid prolonged hospital stays. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.