Introduction of appendiceal CT: impact on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation rates.
(1/742)
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of appendiceal computed tomography (CT) availability on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation rates. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Appendiceal CT is 98% accurate. However, its impact on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation rates has not been reported. METHODS: The authors reviewed the medical records of 493 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy between 1992 and 1995, 209 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy in 1997 (59% of whom had appendiceal CT), and 206 patients who underwent appendiceal CT in 1997 without subsequent appendectomy. RESULTS: Before appendiceal CT, 98/493 patients (20%) taken to surgery had a normal appendix. After CT availability, 15/209 patients (7%) taken to surgery had a normal appendix; 7 patients did not have CT, 5 patients had surgery despite a negative CT, and 3 patients had a false-positive CT. Negative appendectomy rates were lowered overall (20% to 7%), in men (11% to 5%), in women (35% to 11%), in boys (10% to 5%), and in girls (18% to 12%). Appendiceal perforation rates dropped from 22% to 14% after CT availability. CT excluded appendicitis in 206 patients in 1997 who avoided appendectomy and identified alternative diagnoses in 105 of these patients (51%). CONCLUSION: The availability of appendiceal CT coincided with a drop in the negative appendectomy rate from 20% to 7% in all patients, and to only 3% in patients with a positive CT. Perforation rates decreased from 22% to 14%. Appendiceal CT can be advocated in nearly all female and many male patients. (+info)
Psoas abscesses complicating colonic disease: imaging and therapy.
(2/742)
Most surgeons think of psoas abscesses as a very rare condition related to tuberculosis of the spine, but in contemporary surgical practice they are more usually a complication of gastrointestinal disease. A case note study was undertaken on all patients treated for psoas abscess at two large hospitals in the mid-Trent region over a 2-year period. All seven patients presented with pyrexia, psoas spasm, a tender mass and leucocytosis. The diagnosis was made on abdominal radiographs in one patient, CT scan in three, MRI in two, and ultrasound in one. Aetiological factors included Crohn's disease in three, appendicitis in two, and sigmoid diverticulitis and metastatic colorectal carcinoma in one each. Six patients underwent transabdominal resection of the diseased bowel, retroperitoneal debridement and external drainage of the abscess cavity. Percutaneous drainage was performed in one. Two patients had more than one surgical exploration for complications. There were no deaths and the hospital stay ranged from 8-152 days. Psoas abscess can be a difficult and protracted problem. Bowel resection, thorough debridement, external drainage and concomitant antibiotics are essential for psoas abscesses complicating gastrointestinal disease. Defunctioning stomas may be necessary. However, in some cases a multidisciplinary approach may be required, as psoas abscesses can involve bone and joints. (+info)
Simultaneous rupturing heterotopic pregnancy and acute appendicitis in an in-vitro fertilization twin pregnancy.
(3/742)
The presentation of acute abdominal pain in young women is not an unusual occurrence in casualty and gynaecology departments. Both acute appendicitis and ectopic pregnancy have to be considered and investigated, as these two conditions are accepted as the most common surgical causes of an acute abdomen. Difficulties in correctly identifying the cause of the pain can be hazardous to the patient and care needs to be taken in obtaining a prompt and accurate diagnosis enabling the most appropriate management. The case report presented here describes the extremely unusual occurrence of both these acute conditions happening simultaneously with the added complication of an ongoing twin pregnancy and it highlights the need to look beyond the most obvious diagnosis and always to expect the unexpected. (+info)
Is perforation of the appendix a risk factor for tubal infertility and ectopic pregnancy? An appraisal of the evidence.
(4/742)
OBJECTIVE: To critically assess the evidence that appendiceal perforation is a risk factor for subsequent tubal infertility or ectopic pregnancy. DATA SOURCES: Epidemiologic studies investigating the relationship between appendectomy and infertility or ectopic pregnancy were identified by searching the MEDLINE database from 1966 to 1997. Appropriate citations were also extracted from a manual search of the bibliographies of selected papers. STUDY SELECTION: Twenty-three articles were retrieved. Only 4 presented original data including comparisons to a nonexposed control group and they form the basis for this study. DATA EXTRACTION: Because the raw data or specific techniques of data analysis were not always explicitly described, indices of risk for exposure were extracted from the data as presented and were analysed without attempting to convert them to a common measure. DATA SYNTHESIS: Articles were assessed according to the criteria of the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group for evaluating articles on harm. Review of the literature yielded estimates of the risk of adverse fertility outcomes ranging from 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 to 2.5) for ectopic pregnancy after an appendectomy to 4.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 14.9) for tubal infertility from perforation of the appendix. Recall bias, and poor adjustment for confounding variables in some reports, weakened the validity of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: The methodologic weaknesses of the studies do not permit acceptance of increased risk of tubal pregnancy or infertility as a consequence of perforation of the appendix, so a causal relationship cannot be supported by the data currently available. Only a well-designed case-control study with unbiased ascertainment of exposure and adjustment for confounding variables will provide a definitive answer. (+info)
Day-care laparoscopic appendectomies.
(5/742)
OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the safety of laparoscopic appendectomy in a day-care setting and to compare patients selected for laparoscopic versus open appendectomy. DESIGN: A retrospective, nonrandomized study. SETTING: A community hospital in a small town in British Columbia. PATIENTS: Ninety-four consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. INTERVENTIONS: Each patient underwent laparoscopic or open appendectomy as selected by the operating surgeon. OUTCOME MEASURES: Duration of operation and of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The average operating time was 32 minutes for open appendectomy and 36 minutes for laparoscopic appendectomy. Two (4%) of the 52 patients who had a laparoscopic appendectomy had significant complications; 1 of them required reoperation for intra-abdominal abscess. Thirty-nine (75%) of the laparoscopic appendectomies were done as day-care procedures. The average length of stay for the remaining patients was 2.1 days. The overall complication rate for patients who underwent open appendectomy was 20%. The average length of stay for these patients was 3.2 days; no patient was discharged within 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy can be safely performed as a day-care procedure, even for selected patients with gangrenous or perforated appendices. Patients typically selected for open appendectomy include children and those with more advanced infection. (+info)
Appendix abscess: a surgical giant presenting as a geriatric giant.
(6/742)
CASE REPORT: A women aged 102 years presented with falls and was found to have an atypical presentation of appendicitis. CONCLUSION: This illustrates the non-specific presentation of disease in old age and the importance of a careful medical assessment of people who have fallen. (+info)
A meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis.
(7/742)
OBJECTIVE: To determine if any significant differences exist between laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA). DESIGN: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LA to OA. DATA SOURCES: An extensive literature search was conducted for appropriate articles published between January 1990 and March 1997. Articles were initially retrieved through MEDLINE with MeSH terms "appendicitis" or "appendectomy" and "laparoscopy". Additional methods included cross-referencing bibliographics of retrieved articles, hand searching abstracts from relevant meetings and consultation with a content expert. STUDY SELECTION: Only RCTs published in English in which patients had a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis were included. DATA EXTRACTION: The outcomes of interest included operating time, hospital stay, readmission rates, return to normal activity and complications. The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager 3.0 was used to calculate odds ratios (OR), weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The random-effects model was used for statistical analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twelve trials met the inclusion criteria. Because there were insufficient data in some trials, operating time, hospitalization and return to work were assessed in only 8 trials. Mean operating time was significantly longer with LA (WMD 18.10 minutes, 95% CI 12.87 to 23.15 minutes). There were fewer wound infections in LA (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.69), but no significant differences in intra-abdominal abscess rates (OR 1.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 5.58). There was no significant difference in the mean length of hospital stay (WMD -0.16 days, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.15 days) or readmission rates (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.48). However, the return to normal activity was significantly earlier with LA (WMD -5.79 days, 95% CI -7.38 to -4.21 days). Sensitivity analyses did not affect the results. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that operating room time is significantly longer, hospital stay is unchanged but return to normal activities is significantly earlier with LA. (+info)
Laparoscopy in the management of children with chronic recurrent abdominal pain.
(8/742)
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the results of diagnostic laparoscopy in children with chronic recurrent abdominal pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen children with chronic recurrent abdominal pain were subjected to diagnostic laparoscopy. Ages varied from 10 to 17 years. There were six males and seven females. Abdominal pain was present from 3 weeks to 12 months (mean, 2 months). Extensive laboratory and imaging studies did not contribute to the diagnosis. In all patients, the pain was disabling and severe enough to warrant repeated visits to the pediatrician, emergency room visits, or hospital admissions, as well as absence from school. RESULTS: All children recovered uneventfully. Laparoscopic findings that identified the cause of abdominal pain were obtained in 12 of 13 patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy was done in all patients. There were no operative complications. One child presented three months later with incomplete small bowel obstruction, which resolved with conservative management. There were no other postoperative complications. Follow-up varied from six months to three years. Abdominal pain resolved in ten patients. One patient presented eight months later with biliary dyskinesia. She improved following laparoscopic cholecystectomy and later on sphincterotomy, but her pain has not yet completely resolved. One patient presented six months later with abdominal pain secondary to intestinal adhesions. Her pain completely resolved after laparoscopic lysis of adhesions. A third patient who developed lower abdominal pain six months after laparoscopy improved with conservative management and antibiotics for pelvic inflammatory disease. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic laparoscopy is a valuable procedure in the management of children with chronic recurrent abdominal pain. In the present study, laparoscopic examination revealed the cause of abdominal pain in most patients, and this pain resolved in most cases. Based on our experience, we recommend diagnostic laparoscopy early in the course of debilitating chronic recurrent abdominal pain in children. Appendectomy should be done when no other significant cause of abdominal pain has been identified, even if the appendix looks normal. (+info)