Inter-rater concordance of wound classifications in patients undergoing appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread utilization of a four-stage wound classification system to risk-adjust operations for surgical site infection (SSI) rates, we are not aware of any study evaluating the definitions of the wound classes for clarity. We limited our study of wound classifications to appendectomies and posed the question whether different reviewers classify individual cases differently. METHODS: We evaluated the wound classifications of 105 consecutive appendectomies in our community hospital. Four reviewers graded retrospectively the wound classifications, first after reading the description of the appendix in the operative report and again after reading the pathology report. The wound classifications of the four reviewers were evaluated for concordance with the original operating room nurse (ORN) assignment. RESULTS: The kappa scores for inter-observer concordance of wound classifications among the four reviewers based on their interpretation of the operative report and the ORN who originally classified the operation ranged from 0.1028 to 0.1597. By conventional standards, this represents no better than "slight agreement" for any of the reviewers. We found that 19%, 50%, 94%, 95%, or 96% of our appendectomies would be considered "high risk," Class 3 or 4, operations depending on which rater classified the operation. The additional information contained in the pathology reports did not change the distribution of wound classifications of the four reviewers significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated considerable differences in the distribution of wound classifications of appendectomies among our ORNs and retrospective reviewers. A review of the surgical literature supports our finding that the incision classification system utilized commonly lacks precision, at least in the rating of appendectomies. We recommend that further studies be performed to determine whether changes in the definitions of wound classes are warranted.

Factors associated with time to laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

AIM: To determine patient and process of care factors associated with performance of timely laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review of 88 consecutive patients with acute cholecystitis was conducted. Data collected included demographic data, co-morbidities, symptoms and physical findings at presentation, laboratory and radiological investigations, length of stay, complications, and admission service (medical or surgical). Patients not undergoing cholecystectomy during this hospitalization were excluded from analysis. Hierarchical generalized linear models were constructed to assess the association of pre-operative diagnostic procedures, presenting signs, and admitting service with time to surgery. RESULTS: Seventy cases met inclusion and exclusion criteria, among which 12 were admitted to the medical service and 58 to the surgical service. Mean +/- SD time to surgery was 39.3 +/- 43 h, with 87% of operations performed within 72 h of hospital arrival. In the adjusted models, longer time to surgery was associated with number of diagnostic studies and endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP, P = 0.01) as well with admission to medical service without adjustment for ERCP (P < 0.05). Patients undergoing both magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and computed tomography (CT) scans experienced the longest waits for surgery. Patients admitted to the surgical versus medical service underwent surgery earlier (30.4 +/- 34.9 vs 82.7 +/- 55.1 h, P < 0.01), had less post-operative complications (12% vs 58%, P < 0.01), and shorter length of stay (4.3 +/- 3.4 vs 8.1 +/- 5.2 d, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Admission to the medical service and performance of numerous diagnostic procedures, ERCP, or MRCP combined with CT scan were associated with longer time to surgery. Expeditious performance of ERCP and MRCP and admission of medically stable patients with suspected cholecystitis to the surgical service to speed up time to surgery should be considered.

Review article: appendicitis in groin hernias.

To review the clinical presentation, outcome and causes of acute appendicitis presenting within a groin hernia. A comprehensive review of the past 70 years of English language surgical literature was conducted pertaining to acute appendicitis presenting within an inguinal or femoral hernia. Thirty-four reports describing 45 patients were reviewed to determine age, position, gender, pathologic stage at presentation, causal suppositions, and clinical outcomes. Hernial appendicitis presented as an inguinal abscess or a tender inguinal mass, often in the femoral position, and most commonly at the extremes of age. It was almost never recognized preoperatively, and, because of the sequestered nature of the inflammatory process, presented with few classic systemic signs or symptoms suggestive of acute appendicitis. Advanced pathologic stage and death correlated with the patient's age, delay in presentation, and delay in recognition. Evaluation of an inguinal abscess or a nonreducible tender groin hernia presenting in a patient at the extremes of age, should include computed tomography to rule out an occult acute appendicitis within the hernia, as systemic signs and symptoms of appendicitis are rarely evident. The condition appears to be caused by inflammatory adhesions caused by appendicitis occurring within an enlarged hernial orifice rather than appendicitis caused by external compression of the appendix base. Early recognition of this unique presentation of appendicitis allows trans-hernial appendectomy and immediate herniorraphy. Delayed diagnosis requires drainage of abscess with appendectomy and interval hernia repair.