The Fenyö-Lindberg scoring system for appendicitis increases positive predictive value in fertile women--a prospective study in 455 patients randomized to either laparoscopic or open appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Suspected appendicitis is one of the most common indications for acute laparotomy or laparoscopy. The negative laparotomy and laparoscopy rates are high, often in the range of 15-30%, and especially high in some groups of patients such as women of child-bearing age and young patients. Different scoring systems have been introduced in order to improve diagnostic accuracy. The aim of the present study was to analyse the outcome of the Fenyö-Lindberg scoring system in a prospectively randomized multicenter trial and to analyze how well the score performed in stratified subgroups. METHODS: The variables of the Fenyö-Lindberg scoring system were collected in a prospective study comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in suspected appendicitis and with four participating centers. None of the hospitals had used the scoring system previously. Since surgeons were unfamiliar with the score, they could not use it as a diagnostic aid. When comparing the score with the clinical outcome, retrospectively, the investigators interpreting the score were blinded regarding the surgical outcome. RESULTS: Positive predictive value (PPV) of the Fenyö-Lindberg score was higher than that of the surgeon's clinical diagnosis in the patient cohort [0.90 vs 0.79 (p < 0.001)]. The score demonstrated an improvement of PPV in women [0.83 vs 0.70 (p < 0.01)]. PPV was increased in women between 15 and 50 years of age. In women aged 15-30 years and 31-50 years PPV increased from 0.69 to 0.82 and 0.68 to 0.86, respectively (p < 0.01). Both the sensitivity (0.77) and the specificity (0.69) of the score were, however, low. CONCLUSION: The Fenyö-Lindberg score is an inexpensive clinical tool that may improve the diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis in women of childbearing age, which is a group of patients where the diagnostic accuracy usually is low and where the arsenal of diagnostic tools such as computed tomography is limited because of radiation. The low specificity of the score in women of childbearing age must, however, be kept in mind.

Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in overweight patients.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been associated with a faster recovery and less postoperative pain than the open technique. However, few data are available on the clinical outcome of LA in overweight patients. METHODS: A group of 106 patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 26.4, representing the upper quintile of 500 prospectively randomized patients, were included in the study. They were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic or open appendectomy (OA). Operating and anesthesia times, postoperative pain, complications, hospital stay, functional index (1 week postoperatively), sick leave, and time to full recovery were documented. RESULTS: In OA, the operating time for overweight patients was significantly longer than that for patients in the normal weight range (40 vs 35 min, p < 0.05). In LA, there was no difference in operating time between the normal and overweight patients. Overweight patients who underwent LA had longer operating and anesthesia times than their OA counterparts (55 vs 40 min, p < 0.001; and 125 vs 100 min, p < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative pain was significantly greater in overweight patients who underwent OA than in those treated with the laparoscopic technique. Postoperative pain was also significantly greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in patients of normal weight after 4 weeks; the clinical significance may, however, be of less importance since the values are low (0.26 vs 0.09, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two operating techniques in terms of complications. Hospital stay was longer for overweight patients than for normal-weight patients undergoing OA (3.0 vs 2.0, p < 0.01). The functional index did not differ between any group of patients. Sick leave was longer for overweight patients who underwent OA than for normal-weight patients treated with the same technique (17 vs 13 days, p < 0.01). In the laparoscopic group, however, there were no differences between the overweight and normal-weight patients. Time to full recovery was greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in the overweight patients in the LA group (22 vs 15 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, overweight patients who were submitted to LA had less postoperative pain and a faster postoperative recovery than overweight patients who had OA. LA also abolished some of the negative effects that overweight had on operating time, hospital stay, and sick leave with the open technique. However, anesthesia and operating times were significantly longer in LA for both overweight patients and those with a normal BMI.

Conversion from laparoscopic to open appendicectomy: a possible drawback of the laparoscopic technique?

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the reasons for, and outcome of, conversion from laparoscopic to open appendicectomy and to identify factors that may predict the need for conversion. DESIGN: Subgroup analysis from a randomised multicentre study. SETTING: One university hospital and four county hospitals, Sweden. SUBJECTS: A total of 500 patients were randomised to laparoscopic (n = 244) or open (n = 256) appendicectomy. Thirty operations (12%) were converted to open appendicectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reasons for conversion, outcome, and preoperative predictive variables. RESULTS: Difficult anatomy or the presence of an abscess were the main reasons for conversion (25/30). The incidence of perforated appendicitis was higher among patients who required conversion compared with both the open and laparoscopic group. Operating time, anaesthetic time, and duration of hospital stay were longer after conversion. Time to full recovery and length of sick leave were also longer, except for patients with perforated appendicitis. There was no difference in the complication rate. No predictive factors were identified. CONCLUSION: The main reasons for conversion were difficult anatomy and the presence of an abscess. After conversion patients recovered more slowly than those operated on laparoscopically or by primary open operation.

Contrast radiography in small intestinal obstruction, a valuable diagnostic tool?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic and therapeutic potential of plain abdominal radiographs and contrast radiography in patients with suspected small intestinal obstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: General hospital, Sweden. MATERIAL: 2357 sets of plain abdominal radiographic casenotes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analysis of plain abdominal radiographs for small intestinal obstruction. Establishment of the time that subsequent contrast radiography medium took to reach the caecum, and its success rate. RESULTS: Of the 2357 plain abdominal films 1599 (68%) did not show small intestinal obstruction, 425 (18%) showed intermediate obstruction, and 333 (14%) showed small intestinal obstruction. The water-soluble contrast medium reached the colon in 394/591 (67%) of the cases with intermediate or complete small intestinal obstruction. Although the contrast medium passed to the colon there was remaining abnormality with dilated small intestine in 71/212 (33%) of the cases with intermediate obstruction and in 95/143 (66%) of the small intestinal obstruction group. The time for the contrast medium to reach the colon was 3.4 hours in the normal group, 5.5 hours in the intermediate group and 8.9 hours in the obstruction group. CONCLUSION: The plain abdominal radiographs seem to predict the success of follow-through examinations. Contrast radiography is safe and may have a therapeutic potential in small intestinal obstruction.

[Acute abdomen calls for considerable care resources. Analysis of 3727 in-patients in the county of Stockholm during the first quarter of 1995]. / Akut buksjukdom kräver stora vårdresurser. Analys av 3,727 inlagda patienter första kvartalet 1995 i Stockholms län.

A total of 3,727 in-patients with acute abdominal symptoms were identified during the first quarter of 1995 at the surgical clinics of the nine hospitals with emergency departments in the county of Stockholm. The diagnoses were: non-specific abdominal pain 24%; cholecystitis 9%; appendicitis 8%; bowel obstruction 7%; intra-abdominal malignancy, diseases of the urinary tract and peptic ulcer 6% each; gastrointestinal hemorrhage, diverticulitis of the colon and pancreatitis 5% each; other diseases as a cause of abdominal symptoms, 19%. 1,601 operations were performed of which 47% were endoscopic procedures. The mean duration of hospital stay was 4.8 days. The length of stay increased significantly with age. The age-related relative frequency of hospitalization due to acute abdominal pain was also dramatically higher in the elderly cohorts. These facts and the prognosis of an 18% increase of inhabitants 50 years of age or older until 2010 in Greater Stockholm signal an increased need of hospital resources for this large group of patients in the coming years.

Prospective randomized multicentre study of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy.

BACKGROUND: A prospective randomized multicentre study was performed to compare the outcome of laparoscopic and open appendicectomy in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. METHODS: A total of 523 patients was randomized, but because of 23 withdrawals the outcome in 500 patients is reported, 244 in the laparoscopic group and 256 in the open group. RESULTS: Patients having laparoscopic appendicectomy recovered more quickly than those having open surgery (13 versus 21 days, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in duration of sick leave after operation (laparoscopic group 11 days versus open group 14 days). Postoperative pain (at 24 h, 7 days and 14 days) was less after laparoscopic operations and a functional index 1 week after operation was more favourable in these patients (P < 0.001). Operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (60 versus 35 min, P < 0.01). Hospital stay and complications did not differ between the groups. Thirty laparoscopic procedures (12 per cent) were converted to open appendicectomy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendicectomy is as safe as open appendicectomy and has the advantage of allowing a quicker recovery.

Diagnostic decision support in suspected acute appendicitis: validation of a simplified scoring system.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a simplified scoring system as an aid to the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. DESIGN: Open prospective study. SETTING: County district hospital, and university hospital, Sweden. SUBJECTS: 1167 Patients with suspected appendicitis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Correlation between scoring system and final diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 475 patients were operated on and 392 (82.5%) of these had histologically verified appendicitis. The negative laparotomy rate was 17.5% (11.2% for men and 25.4% for women). The sensitivity of the scoring system for appendicitis at the main cut-off point (score -2 or more) was 0.73 and the specificity was 0.87. At the cut-off level (score - 17 or less) for predicting non-specific abdominal pain (NSAP) the proportion of correctly classified patients was 0.72 and the proportion of false negatives (patients with appendicitis classified as NSAP) was 0.14. Analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showed that the scoring system performed slightly worse in the university hospital (area 0.83) than in the district hospital where it was originally developed (area 0.89). CONCLUSION: The scoring system was a valid instrument for discriminating between acute appendicitis and NSAP in the two centres studied. Use of the scoring system in daily clinical work was associated with a reduced rate of negative laparotomies.

[Appendectomy in Sweden. A survey and proposal for quality indicators]. / Appendektomi i Sverige. En enkätundersäokning och förslag till kvalitetsindikatorer.

Something over 12,000 appendectomies are performed in Sweden annually. Preoperative diagnosis and outcome were the subject of a survey carried out in 1991. Based on analysis of the results and a review of recently published reports, the article presents proposals for quality markers in appendectomy: the frequency of healthy appendixes operated, of perforated appendixes, and of postoperative infection.

Treatment of appendiceal abscess.

Appendiceal abscess occurring in 193 patients during a 14-year period is reviewed. Treatment was nonsurgical in 98 patients, with a complication rate of 3%. In the 95 surgically treated patients the complication rate was 32%. One patient died. 'Interval' elective appendectomy was performed in 80 cases and the complication rate was 23%. Among the 32 patients without surgery or in whom the appendix was not removed at laparotomy, the recurrence rate was 3%. No malignancy was found at colonic radiography in 84 conservatively treated patients. Based on these findings, the following strategy is recommended for management of appendiceal abscess. 1) Initially conservative treatment, with surgical intervention if this fails. 2) 'Interval' elective appendectomy not routinely undertaken. 3) For patients older than 40, follow-up with colonic radiography, possibly colonoscopy and, if necessary, also exploratory laparotomy to exclude intraabdominal malignancy.

Acute abdominal pain in patients over 50 years of age.

This study aimed to discover whether the disease spectrum in elderly patients (50 years and over) differed from that in other ages, and to compare patient presentation, progress and outcome between different age groups. In all, a total of 2406 patients from the OMGE series who were aged 50 and over were studied. Cholecystitis was the commonest disease category, commoner even than NSAP and appendicitis. Obstruction was more than three times as common in the elderly patients. One in four obstruction cases eventually proved to be due to an undiagnosed hernia. Cancer rates rose to 24% in patients over 70; whilst vascular causes accounted for 2.3% of patients over 50. As regards outcome, the risk to life rose steeply after the age of 50, possibly reflecting low rates of diagnostic accuracy. The clinical presentation of appendicitis was quite different in those over 50. Patients over 50 years with acute abdominal pain should be viewed differently from other younger patients, with special care being taken to look for hernia, cancer, and vascular disease. Educational material should also be reviewed to reflect the different features of the elderly patient. It is clear that further data on elderly patients are urgently required.

Routine use of a scoring system for decision-making in suspected acute appendicitis in adults.

Clinical data from 259 patients with suspected acute appendicitis were prospectively collected and used in construction of a Bayesian scoring system, comprising 19 attributes, for preoperative diagnosis. The scoring system was integrated into the routine clinical management of a prospective series of 830 patients. Laparotomy was performed in 310 cases, and of these 256 had acute appendicitis (perforation in 14%). Excluding 6 cases with normal appendix but laparotomy mandatory for other reasons, the negative laparotomy rate was 15.5%. This rate was significantly lower than in earlier series from the same hospital and in more than 8,000 appendectomies performed in Sweden since 1969. The scoring system had 90.2% sensitivity, 91.4% specificity, 82.5% positive predictive value and 95.4% negative predictive value. The system is regarded only as an aid in diagnosis, to be used in combination with clinicians' judgements. Construction of a local data base probably is essential for results equivalent to those here reported.