6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Is Emergency Appendicectomy Better Than Elective Appendicectomy for the Treatment of Appendiceal Phlegmon?: A Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Appendiceal phlegmon is considered to be sequelae to acute appendicitis which presents as an appendiceal mass composed of the inflamed appendix, the adjacent bowel loops, and the greater omentum. The definitive diagnosis can be obtained by a CT scan of the abdomen. Though conservative management was the most practiced approach, recent studies have shifted the trends towards immediate appendicectomy for the management of appendiceal phlegmon. Thus, the management of appendiceal phlegmon has been debatable. Evidence to support this review was gathered via the PubMed database as this database uses the Medline, PubMed Central, and NLM databases and also offers a quick diverse search with up-to-date citations and numerous open-access free articles focused on Medicine. We did not include other databases like Google Scholar, Embase, and Scopus due to its limited access to free articles, recent articles, and citation information. Search terms used were combinations of "Appendicitis," "Appendiceal phlegmon", "Appendiceal phlegmon (AND) appendicectomy ". The resultant studies were reviewed and cross‐referenced for additional reports. Emergency appendicectomy is defined as appendicectomy carried out during the same, initial admission. An elective or interval appendicectomy is an appendicectomy carried out four to six weeks after the initial episode at a later admission. The interval is bridged by antibiotics and conservative management. Emergency appendicectomy is considered to have a higher rate of complications when compared to conservative management for appendiceal phlegmon. However, interval appendicectomy requires multiple re-admissions, leads to delayed diagnosis of any underlying pathology, and an increased risk of recurrent appendicitis. In our review, we aimed to compare and contrast the effectiveness of the different treatment modalities available for appendiceal phlegmon. Though the meta-analyses showed an increased association of complications with emergency appendicectomy, they included studies conducted before the laparoscopic era. Emergency appendicectomy decreases the financial burden, re-admission rate, and aids in the early diagnosis of any underlying pathology. In the laparoscopic era, we can consider the shifting trends towards emergency appendicectomy for the management of appendiceal phlegmon.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          A systematic review of the nonsurgical treatment of patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon, with emphasis on the success rate, need for drainage of abscesses, risk of undetected serious disease, and need for interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence. Patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon are traditionally managed by nonsurgical treatment and interval appendectomy. This practice is controversial with proponents of immediate surgery and others questioning the need for interval appendectomy. A Medline search identified 61 studies published between January 1964 and December 2005 reporting on the results of nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon. The results were pooled taking the potential clustering on the study-level into account. A meta-analysis of the morbidity after immediate surgery compared with that after nonsurgical treatment was performed. Appendiceal abscess or phlegmon is found in 3.8% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.6-4.9) of patients with appendicitis. Nonsurgical treatment fails in 7.2% (CI: 4.0-10.5). The need for drainage of an abscess is 19.7% (CI: 11.0-28.3). Immediate surgery is associated with a higher morbidity compared with nonsurgical treatment (odds ratio, 3.3; CI: 1.9-5.6; P < 0.001). After successful nonsurgical treatment, a malignant disease is detected in 1.2% (CI: 0.6-1.7) and an important benign disease in 0.7% (CI: 0.2-11.9) during follow-up. The risk of recurrence is 7.4% (CI: 3.7-11.1). The results of this review of mainly retrospective studies support the practice of nonsurgical treatment without interval appendectomy in patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A meta-analysis comparing conservative treatment versus acute appendectomy for complicated appendicitis (abscess or phlegmon).

            No standardized approach is available for the management of complicated appendicitis defined as appendiceal abscess and phlegmon. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare conservative treatment versus acute appendectomy. Comparative studies were identified by a literature search. The end points evaluated were overall complications, need for reoperation, duration of hospital stay, and duration of intravenous antibiotics. Heterogeneity was assessed and a sensitivity analysis was performed to account for bias in patient selection. Seventeen studies (16 nonrandomized retrospective and 1 nonrandomized prospective) reported on 1,572 patients: 847 patients received conservative treatment and 725 had acute appendectomy. Conservative treatment was associated with significantly less overall complications, wound infections, abdominal/pelvic abscesses, ileus/bowel obstructions, and reoperations. No significant difference was found in the duration of first hospitalization, the overall duration of hospital stay, and the duration of intravenous antibiotics. Overall complications remained significantly less in the conservative treatment group during sensitivity analysis of studies including only pediatric patients, high-quality studies, more recent studies, and studies with a larger group of patients. The conservative management of complicated appendicitis is associated with a decrease in complication and reoperation rate compared with acute appendectomy, and it has a similar duration of hospital stay. Because of significant heterogeneity between studies, additional studies should be undertaken to confirm these findings. Copyright 2010. Published by Mosby, Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Differentiation of perforated from nonperforated appendicitis at CT.

              To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of five computed tomographic (CT) criteria in the differentiation of perforated from nonperforated appendicitis. CT scans of 94 patients with surgically proven appendicitis were classified on review as showing perforation if one of five CT findings was present. The authors calculated the sensitivity and specificity for each finding by comparing the predicted outcome to the surgical and pathologic outcome. The perforated group comprised 39 patients and the nonperforated group comprised 55 patients. Sensitivity for abscess, phlegmon, extraluminal air, extraluminal appendicolith, and focal defect in enhancing appendiceal wall individually were 36%, 46%, 36%, 21%, and 64%, respectively. Sensitivity for any one of the five findings was 94.9%. Specificities were 100% for all findings except for phlegmon (95%). Groups differed with respect to age: 47 years +/- 19 (mean +/- SD) for perforated appendicitis and 30 years +/- 13 for nonperforated appendicitis (P <.001). Groups also differed with respect to appendiceal diameter: 15 mm +/- 4.9 for perforated appendicitis and 12 mm +/- 3.3 for nonperforated appendicitis (P =.049). A dedicated search for five specific CT findings allowed an overall sensitivity of 94.9% for perforated appendicitis. Among findings with 100% specificity, a focal defect in the enhancing appendiceal wall achieved the highest sensitivity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cureus
                Cureus
                2168-8184
                Cureus
                Cureus (Palo Alto (CA) )
                2168-8184
                12 December 2020
                December 2020
                : 12
                : 12
                : e12045
                Affiliations
                [1 ] General Surgery, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospital, Bangalore, IND
                [2 ] General Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh, IND
                [3 ] General Surgery, Larkin Community Hospital, Miami, USA
                [4 ] General Surgery, South Texas Health System, Edinburg, USA
                [5 ] Internal Medicine, Kiruba Hospital, Coimbatore, IND
                [6 ] Surgical Oncology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Boca Raton, USA
                Author notes
                Article
                10.7759/cureus.12045
                7802400
                33447475
                51d24199-544d-46fe-8b9a-c3bfccace281
                Copyright © 2020, Ahmed et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 12 December 2020
                Categories
                Pathology
                Pathology
                Gastroenterology
                Gastroenterology
                General Surgery
                General Surgery

                appendix,appendiceal phlegmon,appendiceal mass,emergency appendicectomy,elective appendicectomy,laparoscopic appendicectomy

                Comments

                Comment on this article