Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy vs. Laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background and study aims: To assess the efficacy and clinical outcomes of endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) versus laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA). Patients and methods: We adopted propensity score matching (1:1) to compare ERAT and LA patients with uncomplicated AA from April 2017 to March 2020. We reviewed a total of 2880 patients with suspected acute appendicitis, of whom 422 patients with uncomplicated AA met the matching criteria (ERAT, 79; LA, 343), yielding 78 pairs of patients. Results: The rate of curative treatment within one year after ERAT was 92.1%; 95% CI, [83.8% - 96.3%]. The percentage of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ≤ 3 at six hours after treatment was 94.7%; 95% CI [87.2% - 97.9%] in the ERAT group, and significantly higher than that in the LA group 83.3%; 95% CI [73.5% - 90.0%]. Median operative/procedure time and median hospital length of stay in the ERAT group were significantly lower compared to the LA group. At one year, the median recurrence time was 50 days (IQRs, 25-127) in the ERAT group. The overall adverse event rate was 24.3%; 95% CI [14.8% - 33.9%] in the LA group and 18.4%; 95% CI [9.7% - 27.1%] in the ERAT group, with no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusions: ERAT is a technically feasible method to treat uncomplicated AA compared to LA.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Antibiotics Compared with Operative Treatment in Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis.

Background: Appendicitis is the most common acute abdominal condition affecting general surgical practice. Although appendectomy has been considered the “gold standard” treatment, it has been associated with post-operative complications. Recently, conservative treatment with antibiotics has been considered as an alternative. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate if antibiotics could be cost-effective when compared to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) or open appendectomy (OA).Methods: A prospective study was undertaken to estimate health-related quality of life using a European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions questionnaire for antibiotic and operative treatment and to ascertain indirect and direct non-medical costs in a cohort between November 2018 and October 2019. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at 1 month and a net benefit at 1 year after surgery were estimated. A Tornado diagram was plotted to determine one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses; a cost-effectiveness (CE) scatter plot and CE acceptability curve were also generated.Results: ICERs were estimated from cost-utility analysis comparisons between individual antibiotics (beta-lactam, quinolone, and cephalosporin + metronidazole), LA, and OA in uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Antibiotics showed improved cost utility compared to operative treatments with an ICER of -9,585.66 USD per utility gained at 1 month, and the net benefit at 1 year was 3,250.08 USD. Conclusions: Base on short term evaluation, antibiotics might represent a lower cost treatment option with better cost utility compared to operative treatment options in uncomplicated acute appendicitis patients. As such, antibiotic treatment might be considered as an alternative option where resources are limited to minimize complication rates associated with operative treatments.

Evaluation of conservative management in uncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background: Appendectomy has been the treatment for acute appendicitis for years based on the understanding that acute appendicitis always leads to perforation and peritonitis. However, there is growing evidence that a significant proportion of patients can be successfully managed with conservative treatment without developing gangrene or perforation. Conservative treatment avoids discomfort, surgery-related morbidities and minimizes treatment cost.Methods: 60 patients taken up for conservative management were evaluated and followed up for 6 months. Study patients received intravenous antibiotics for 2 days. Repeated clinical and TLC monitoring were done. In patients whose clinical condition did not improve, appendectomy was performed. Follow-up at 10 days, 30 days, 3 months and 6 months were carried out to assess recurrence in conservatively managed patients.Results: In this study, the mean age was 25.65 years with a standard deviation of ±8.96 years. The incidence of uncomplicated appendicitis was 63.3% in males and 36.7% in females. Mean Alvarado score was 7.75 with a standard deviation of ±1.20. Failure of conservative management (conversion to appendectomy) was observed in 11.7% of patients and 4 patients (6.6%) had recurrence within 6 months. The overall treatment efficacy was 81.7%.Conclusions: In many cases, first attack of uncomplicated acute appendicitis can be treated successfully by conservative management. Treatment failure on primary admission as well as short-term recurrence up to six months after conservative treatment is low and acceptable. Incidence of complications like perforation and abscess formation are also statistically low.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nonoperative management versus open and laparoscopic surgery for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in Colombia

Background Traditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer’s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results LA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was $24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient. Conclusions LA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer’s perspective in the Colombian health system.

A clinical study on conservative management of acute appendicitis in a tertiary care centre

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common clinical entity which is treated surgically by appendectomy. In recent years acute uncomplicated appendicitis can also be managed non surgically with antibiotic therapy. Aim and Objective was to assess the outcome of conservative treatment in the management of acute appendicitis.Methods: All patients who were diagnosed as acute appendicitis radiologically were enrolled into the study considering inclusion and exclusion criteria. Modified Alvarado score (MAS) was calculated based on clinical symptoms, signs and laboratory investigations. Injection ceftriaxone and injection metronidazole was given for 48-72 hours. Patients who responded for i.v. antibiotics were switched to tablet ciprofloxacin and tablet metronidazole for 7 days and followed for 6 months. Patients who didn’t respond to conservative treatment or had recurrence were classified as treatment failure/recurrence.Results: Totally 100 patients were enrolled in the study, 43 males and 57 females with a ratio of 1:1.32. Majority were in age group of 21-30. Ultrasound was performed in 91 patients, CT scan in 9 patients. 28 patients had MAS between 4-6 and 72 had between 7-9. 82 patients were successfully managed conservatively. 12 patients had failure of conservative treatment and 6 patients had recurrence.Conclusions: Success rate of conservative treatment in patients with MAS 4-6 was more than those with MAS 7-9 in this study. Complicated acute appendicitis should be managed surgically and uncomplicated acute appendicitis can be managed by conservative treatment provided they are strictly followed every month for 6 months to detect recurrences.