Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 11/2017

01-11-2017 | Original Scientific Report

Acute Appendicitis: Still a Surgical Disease? Results from a Propensity Score-Based Outcome Analysis of Conservative Versus Surgical Management from a Prospective Database

Authors: Niccolò Allievi, Asaf Harbi, Marco Ceresoli, Giulia Montori, Elia Poiasina, Federico Coccolini, Michele Pisano, Luca Ansaloni

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 11/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of conservative versus surgical treatment for acute appendicitis.

Background

Although acute appendicitis is a common disease, great debate exists regarding the appropriate management of patients. Conservative treatment has shown positive results in several RCTs, eliciting questions about indications to surgery, therapeutic appropriateness and ethical conduct.

Methods

Data were prospectively collected; a Propensity Score-based matching method was implemented in order to reduce bias arising from characteristics of the patients; a proportion of patients (69 in total) were excluded to obtain two comparable groups of study (1a). Main outcomes of the study were: failure rate, in-hospital length of stay (at first admission and cumulative), post-discharge absence from work. Within the medical group, failure was defined as the necessity for appendectomy after conservative treatment, while it was identified with complications and negative appendectomy within the surgical group (Failure 1). In parallel, an additional definition of failure was proposed (Failure 2) and excluded negative appendectomy from the reasons for failure within the surgical group (5b).

Results

The failure rate for the conservative treatment resulted to be inferior, as compared to the surgical treatment (16.5 vs. 28.4%, OR 0.523 p = 0.019), considering negative appendectomy as a reason for failure. When excluding negative appendectomy from the definition of failure, medical and surgical treatment appeared to perform equally (failure rate: 16.5 vs. 18.3%, OR 1.014 p = 0.965). Patients managed conservatively showed to have a shorter length of stay at first admission than the patients who underwent appendectomy (3.11 vs. 4.11 days, β = −0.628 days, p < 0.0001). A lower number of lost work days after discharge resulted from a conservative approach (6 vs. 14.64 days, β = −8.7 days, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Considering each outcome as part of a wide-angle analysis, the conservative management of acute appendicitis resulted to be safe and effective in the selected group of patients. In terms of failure rate, the medical treatment resulted to perform as effectively as surgical treatment, if negative appendectomy was excluded from failure, or better, when negative appendectomy was included in the definition of failure. A diminished length of stay during the first admission and a reduced number of lost work days were evident with a conservative approach. The comparison between medical and surgical treatment for acute appendicitis requires a change in perspective, from a spare ‘effectiveness analysis’ to a more thorough ‘appropriateness analysis’: in the present study, the conservative treatment showed to address the clinical requirements in terms of therapeutic appropriateness. Although acute appendicitis is considered a ‘surgical disease’, increasing evidence supports the effectiveness and safety of a conservative approach for selected groups of patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ceresoli M, Zucchi A, Allievi N et al (2016) Acute appendicitis: epidemiology, treatment and outcomes-analysis of 16544 consecutive cases. World J Gastrointest Surg 8(10):693CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ceresoli M, Zucchi A, Allievi N et al (2016) Acute appendicitis: epidemiology, treatment and outcomes-analysis of 16544 consecutive cases. World J Gastrointest Surg 8(10):693CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Stewart B, Khanduri P, Mccord C, Uranues S, Rivera FV, Mock C (2014) Global disease burden of conditions requiring emergency surgery. Br J Surg 101(1):9–22CrossRef Stewart B, Khanduri P, Mccord C, Uranues S, Rivera FV, Mock C (2014) Global disease burden of conditions requiring emergency surgery. Br J Surg 101(1):9–22CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Eriksson S, Granström L (1995) Randomized controlled trial of appendicectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 82(2):166–169CrossRefPubMed Eriksson S, Granström L (1995) Randomized controlled trial of appendicectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 82(2):166–169CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Hansson J, Körner U, Khorram-Manesh A, Solberg A, Lundholm K (2009) Randomized clinical trial of antibiotic therapy versus appendicectomy as primary treatment of acute appendicitis in unselected patients. Br J Surg 96(5):473–481CrossRefPubMed Hansson J, Körner U, Khorram-Manesh A, Solberg A, Lundholm K (2009) Randomized clinical trial of antibiotic therapy versus appendicectomy as primary treatment of acute appendicitis in unselected patients. Br J Surg 96(5):473–481CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Vons C, Barry C, Maitre S et al (2011) Amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid versus appendicectomy for treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 377(9777):1573–1579CrossRefPubMed Vons C, Barry C, Maitre S et al (2011) Amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid versus appendicectomy for treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 377(9777):1573–1579CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Salminen P, Paajanen H, Rautio T et al (2015) Antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. JAMA 313(23):2340CrossRefPubMed Salminen P, Paajanen H, Rautio T et al (2015) Antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. JAMA 313(23):2340CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F et al (2011) Surgery versus conservative antibiotic treatment in acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dig Surg 28(3):210–222CrossRefPubMed Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F et al (2011) Surgery versus conservative antibiotic treatment in acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dig Surg 28(3):210–222CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Liu Z-H, Li C, Zhang X-W, Kang L, Wang J-P (2014) Meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of antibiotic versus appendicectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis. Exp Ther Med 7(5):1181–1186CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Liu Z-H, Li C, Zhang X-W, Kang L, Wang J-P (2014) Meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of antibiotic versus appendicectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis. Exp Ther Med 7(5):1181–1186CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Lobo DN (2012) Safety and efficacy of antibiotics compared with appendicectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 344(1):e2156-e2156. doi:10.1136/bmj.e2156 Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Lobo DN (2012) Safety and efficacy of antibiotics compared with appendicectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 344(1):e2156-e2156. doi:10.​1136/​bmj.​e2156
14.
go back to reference Louyer-Villermay JB (1824) Observations pour servir a l’histoire des inflammations de l’appendice du caecum. Arch gén de méd Paris 5:246 Louyer-Villermay JB (1824) Observations pour servir a l’histoire des inflammations de l’appendice du caecum. Arch gén de méd Paris 5:246
15.
go back to reference Fitz R (1886) Perforating inflammation of the vermiform appendix. Am J Med Sci 92:32146 Fitz R (1886) Perforating inflammation of the vermiform appendix. Am J Med Sci 92:32146
16.
go back to reference McBurney C (1889) Experience with early operative interference in cases of disease of the vermiform appendix. N Y Med J 50:676–684 McBurney C (1889) Experience with early operative interference in cases of disease of the vermiform appendix. N Y Med J 50:676–684
17.
go back to reference Stengel A (1908) Appendicitis. In: Osler W, McCrae T (eds) Modern medicine, vol V. Diseases of the alimentary tract. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia Stengel A (1908) Appendicitis. In: Osler W, McCrae T (eds) Modern medicine, vol V. Diseases of the alimentary tract. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia
19.
go back to reference Jones PF (2001) Suspected acute appendicitis: trends in management over 30 years. Br J Surg 88(12):1570–1577CrossRefPubMed Jones PF (2001) Suspected acute appendicitis: trends in management over 30 years. Br J Surg 88(12):1570–1577CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Andersson RE (2007) The natural history and traditional management of appendicitis revisited: spontaneous resolution and predominance of prehospital perforations imply that a correct diagnosis is more important than an early diagnosis. World J Surg 31(1):86–92. doi:10.1007/s00268-006-0056-y CrossRefPubMed Andersson RE (2007) The natural history and traditional management of appendicitis revisited: spontaneous resolution and predominance of prehospital perforations imply that a correct diagnosis is more important than an early diagnosis. World J Surg 31(1):86–92. doi:10.​1007/​s00268-006-0056-y CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Bhangu A, Soreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH, Drake FT (2015) Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet 386(10000):1278–1287CrossRefPubMed Bhangu A, Soreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH, Drake FT (2015) Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet 386(10000):1278–1287CrossRefPubMed
23.
24.
go back to reference Rosenbaum P, Rubin D (1984) Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc 79(387):516–524CrossRef Rosenbaum P, Rubin D (1984) Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc 79(387):516–524CrossRef
25.
go back to reference D’Agostino RB (1998) Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17:2265–2281CrossRefPubMed D’Agostino RB (1998) Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17:2265–2281CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Di Saverio S, Sibilio A, Giorgini E et al (2014) The NOTA study (non operative treatment for acute appendicitis): prospective study on the efficacy and safety of antibiotics (amoxicillin and clavulanic acid) for treating patients with right lower quadrant abdominal pain and long-term follow-up of conservatively treated suspected appendicitis. Ann Surg 260(1):109–117CrossRefPubMed Di Saverio S, Sibilio A, Giorgini E et al (2014) The NOTA study (non operative treatment for acute appendicitis): prospective study on the efficacy and safety of antibiotics (amoxicillin and clavulanic acid) for treating patients with right lower quadrant abdominal pain and long-term follow-up of conservatively treated suspected appendicitis. Ann Surg 260(1):109–117CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Livingston EH, Woodward WA, Sarosi GA, Haley RW (2007) Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management. Ann Surg 245(6):886–892CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Livingston EH, Woodward WA, Sarosi GA, Haley RW (2007) Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management. Ann Surg 245(6):886–892CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Mason RJ (2008) Surgery for appendicitis: is it necessary? Surg Infect 9(4):481–488CrossRef Mason RJ (2008) Surgery for appendicitis: is it necessary? Surg Infect 9(4):481–488CrossRef
31.
32.
go back to reference Leung TTW, Dixon E, Gill M et al (2009) Bowel obstruction following appendectomy: what is the true incidence? Ann Surg 250(1):51–53CrossRefPubMed Leung TTW, Dixon E, Gill M et al (2009) Bowel obstruction following appendectomy: what is the true incidence? Ann Surg 250(1):51–53CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Margenthaler JA, Longo WE, Virgo KS et al (2003) Risk factors for adverse outcomes after the surgical treatment of appendicitis in adults. Ann Surg 238(1):59–66PubMedPubMedCentral Margenthaler JA, Longo WE, Virgo KS et al (2003) Risk factors for adverse outcomes after the surgical treatment of appendicitis in adults. Ann Surg 238(1):59–66PubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Xiao Y, Shi G, Zhang J et al (2015) Surgical site infection after laparoscopic and open appendectomy: a multicenter large consecutive cohort study. Surg Endosc 29(6):1384–1393CrossRefPubMed Xiao Y, Shi G, Zhang J et al (2015) Surgical site infection after laparoscopic and open appendectomy: a multicenter large consecutive cohort study. Surg Endosc 29(6):1384–1393CrossRefPubMed
35.
36.
go back to reference Livingston EH, Fomby TB, Woodward WA, Haley RW (2011) Epidemiological similarities between appendicitis and diverticulitis suggesting a common underlying pathogenesis. Arch Surg 146(3):308–314CrossRefPubMed Livingston EH, Fomby TB, Woodward WA, Haley RW (2011) Epidemiological similarities between appendicitis and diverticulitis suggesting a common underlying pathogenesis. Arch Surg 146(3):308–314CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Flum D (2015) Clinical practice: acute appendicitis—appendectomy or the “antibiotics first” strategy. N Engl J Med 20372:1937–1943CrossRef Flum D (2015) Clinical practice: acute appendicitis—appendectomy or the “antibiotics first” strategy. N Engl J Med 20372:1937–1943CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Hansson J, Körner U, Ludwigs K, Johnsson E, Jönsson C, Lundholm K (2012) Antibiotics as first-line therapy for acute appendicitis: evidence for a change in clinical practice. World J Surg 36(9):2028–2036. doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1738-2 CrossRefPubMed Hansson J, Körner U, Ludwigs K, Johnsson E, Jönsson C, Lundholm K (2012) Antibiotics as first-line therapy for acute appendicitis: evidence for a change in clinical practice. World J Surg 36(9):2028–2036. doi:10.​1007/​s00268-012-1738-2 CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Acute Appendicitis: Still a Surgical Disease? Results from a Propensity Score-Based Outcome Analysis of Conservative Versus Surgical Management from a Prospective Database
Authors
Niccolò Allievi
Asaf Harbi
Marco Ceresoli
Giulia Montori
Elia Poiasina
Federico Coccolini
Michele Pisano
Luca Ansaloni
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 11/2017
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4094-4

Other articles of this Issue 11/2017

World Journal of Surgery 11/2017 Go to the issue