Treatment of appendiceal mass: prospective, randomized clinical trial. Appendiceal mass: conservative therapy followed by interval laparoscopic appendectomy. Prospective evaluation of nonsurgical versus surgical management of appendiceal mass. Conservative approach versus urgent appendectomy in surgical management of acute appendicitis with abscess or phlegmon. Evaluation of early surgical management of complicated appendicitis by appendicular mass. Is a long delay necessary before appendectomy after appendiceal mass formation? A preliminary report. Comparison of therapeutic effectiveness of percutaneous drainage with antibiotics versus antibiotics alone in the treatment of periappendiceal abscess The outcome of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis with diameters ≤ 10 mm. A National Evaluation of the Conservative Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: How Common Is This and What Are the Issues? Ultrasound-based decision making in the treatment of acute appendicitis in children. Randomized clinical trial of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis [Antibiotic treatment of perforated appendicitis in childhood--a prospective study]. Peritoneal drainage and systemic antibiotics after appendicectomy. A prospective trial. Randomized controlled trial of appendicectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis Perforated appendicitis: prospective outcome analysis for 150 children. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics versus surgery for acute nonperforated appendicitis in children: a pilot randomized controlled trial. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Conservative Management of Acute Appendicitis
BACKGROUND Appendiceal mass may be treated in several ways . However , no r and omized trial has been conducted to find the best option . OBJECTIVE To compare the three most commonly used methods for treating appendiceal mass . METHODS Over a three-year period , 60 consecutive patients with appendiceal mass were r and omly allocated to three groups : Group A -- initial conservative treatment followed by interval appendectomy six weeks later ; Group B -- appendectomy as soon as appendiceal mass resolved using conservative means ; Group C -- conservative treatment alone . Short-term outcome measures included operative time , operative difficulty , postoperative complications , length of hospital stay , and duration of time away from work . Long-term outcome measures were : number of hospital visits made , presence of severe incisional pain , scar appearance , and patients with recurrent appendicitis . RESULTS Baseline characteristics were comparable in the three groups . In patients in Group A , operative time was less , adhesions were encountered less frequently , the incision had to be extended less often and post-operative complications were fewer , as compared to Group B. Patients in Group C had the shortest hospital stay and duration of work-days lost ; only 2 of 20 patients in this group developed recurrent appendicitis during a follow-up period of 24 - 52 ( median 33.5 ) months . CONCLUSION Of the three treatment modalities compared , conservative treatment without subsequent appendectomy appears to be the best BACKGROUND Current therapy of patients with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon is in evolution . Controversial areas include initial conservative therapy , drainage of periappendiceal abscesses , and the role of interval appendectomy . OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and efficacy of conservative therapy and of interval laparoscopic appendectomy ( ILA ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with signs and symptoms of acute appendicitis and a palpable right lower quadrant mass were included . Abscess/phlegmon was documented with ultrasound or computerized tomography . After initial therapy with antibiotics , patients were discharged to home . ILA was performed 6 to 12 weeks later . RESULTS Twelve patients were included . Four patients had phlegmonous appendicitis and eight had an abscess , but only four had percutaneous drainage . All patients improved without surgical exploration and were subjected to ILA . ILA was successful in 11 of 12 patients ; a median hospital postoperative stay of 1 day was required , and no perioperative morbidity was encountered . All patients returned to routine activities within 2 weeks of surgery . CONCLUSIONS 1 ) Initial conservative management of patients with appendiceal abscess/phlegmon is prudent , safe , and effective . 2 ) Interval laparoscopic appendectomy can be performed safely and effectively PURPOSE Prospect i ve evaluation was undertaken of surgical findings , complications , morbidity , and hospital stay between initial nonsurgical management versus early surgical intervention of an appendicular mass . METHODS A prospect i ve , nonr and omized study was conducted of 82 consecutive patients ( mean age , 6.9 + /- 3.3 years ) presenting with an appendicular mass over a 5-year period . They were categorized as group 1 , 58.5 % ( 48 of 82 ) nonsurgically managed and an interval appendectomy performed at a mean period of 8.6 + /- 4.6 weeks and group 2 , 41.5 % ( 34 of 82 ) appendectomy at presentation . RESULTS An appendix was identified in all 82 patients in both groups at operation . In-group 1 , recurrent episodes of abdominal pain necessitated interval appendectomy in 39.6 % ( 19 of 48 ) patients at a mean 4.3 + /- 0.8 versus 11.5 + /- 3.7 weeks in 60.4 % ( 29 of 48 ) who underwent scheduled interval appendectomy .  Periappendiceal abscesses present at interval appendectomy in group 1 was ( 38 of 48 ) 79.2 % versus 100 % ( 34 of 34 ) at appendectomy in group 2 . Adhesions at interval appendectomy  in group 1 was 81.3 % ( 39 of 48 ) versus 100 % ( 34 of 34 ) at appendectomy in group 2 . In-group 1 , superficial wound infection was observed in 0 versus 4 wound infections in group 2 . Overall morbidity rate between group 1 and group 2 was statistically significant ( P < .05 ) . Total mean hospital stay in group 1 was 13.2 + /- 1.5 versus 4.8 + /- 0.4 days in group 2 . Of the 48-interval appendectomy specimens , 37 of 48 ( 77 % ) appendices had a patent lumen , and 11 of 48 ( 23 % ) showed fibrosis and obliteration of appendicular lumen . There was no correlation ( r = 0.22 ) between the histopathologic findings and the interval between abscess treatment and interval appendectomy . CONCLUSIONS Early surgical intervention was beneficial over nonoperative management in this cohort of patients . Interval appendectomy is recommended after nonsurgical management of an appendicular mass BACKGROUND Surgical management of acute appendicitis with appendiceal abscess or phlegmon remains controversial . We studied the results of initial conservative treatment ( antibiotics and percutaneous drainage if necessary , with or without interval appendectomy ) compared with immediate surgery . METHODS We undertook an observational , retrospective cohort study of patients with a clinical and radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an abscess or phlegmon , treated in our hospital between January 1997 and March 2009 . Patients younger than 14 , with severe sepsis or with diffuse peritonitis were excluded . A study group of 15 patients with acute appendicitis complicated with an abscess or phlegmon underwent conservative treatment . A control group was composed of the other patients , who all underwent  urgent appendectomy  , matched for age and later r and omized 1:1 . The infectious risk stratification was established with the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System ( NNIS ) index . Dependent variables were hospital stay and surgical site infection . Analysis was with SPSS , with p < 0.05 considered significant . RESULTS Interval appendectomy  was performed in 7 study group patients . Surgical site infection episodes were more frequent in the control group ( 6 vs. 0 , p < 0.001 ) . A greater percentage of high risk patients ( NNIS ≥ 2 ) was identified in the control group ( 80 vs. 28.7 % , p < 0.03 ) , mostly related with contaminated or dirty procedures in this group ( p < 0.001 ) . No significant difference between groups was found in hospital stay . CONCLUSION Initial conservative treatment should be considered the best therapeutic choice for acute appendicitis with abscess or phlegmon AIM This prospect i ve study was done to evaluate the feasibility and safety of immediate appendicectomy in the presence of appendicular mass . METHODS A prospect i ve , nonr and omized study was conducted over 46 consecutive patients ( mean age : 24 ± 8.76 years ) presenting with an appendicular mass over a 4-year period . They were subjected for immediate appendicectomy within 24 h of admission . RESULTS The appendix was identified and removed in all 46 patients at operation . Peri-appendiceal abscesses were present in 25 % ( 11 of 46 ) . There was difficulty with adhesolysis and localization of the appendix in 10%(4 ) of patients . Superficial wound infection had occurred in 8(17 % ) while deep wound infection had occurred in 9%(4 ) patients . The mean hospital stay was 3 ± 0.25 day . No major complications had occurred . CONCLUSIONS Early surgical intervention in patients with an appendicular mass  is feasible , safe and avoids the consequences of the misdiagnosis and mistreatment of other surgical pathologies The st and ard treatment for an appendiceal mass is conservative therapy followed by appendectomy after 6 to 10 weeks . With the advent of antibiotics design ed to prevent the growth of anaerobes , early appendectomy can now be carried out without complication . The authors studied 56 patients with appendiceal mass formation , 26 ( group A ) treated conventionally and 30 ( group B ) treated by early appendectomy .  In group B , the infection rate was 17 % , the mean operating time was 38.7 minutes , the mean hospital stay was 15 days and there was an early return to work . The corresponding parameters for group A were an infection rate of 8 % , a mean operating time of 35.2 minutes , a hospital stay of 19.1 days and a late return to work . Furthermore , 15 % of the patients in group A had a recurrent acute episode during the waiting period . Overall , early appendectomy appears to be a safe and cost-effective treatment for appendiceal mass formation Background The present study was design ed to compare the therapeutic effectiveness of percutaneous drainage with antibiotics versus antibiotics alone in the treatment of appendicitis complicated by periappendiceal abscess . Methods In a prospect i ve study , 50 patients with acute appendicitis complicated by periappendiceal abscess ≥ 3 cm in size were r and omly assigned to two groups . The first group received treatment with ultrasound guided-percutaneous drainage and i.v . antibiotics ( ampicillin , cefuroxime , and metronidazole ) , and the other group received antibiotics only .  Patient ’s baseline characteristics , duration of hospital stay , and treatment outcome and complications were analyzed . Results Appendectomy was avoided in 16/25 patients in the drainage group and 2/25 patients in the non-drainage group during follow-up with RR of 0.39 ( 95 % CI = 0.22–0.62 ; p < 0.05 ) . One patient in the drainage group and 8 patients in the non-drainage group underwent surgery in the first month after the beginning of treatment . Eight patients in the drainage group and 15 in the non-drainage group underwent interval appendectomy . There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding patient demographics , abscess size , and pretreatment clinical symptoms . Hospital stay up to the subsidence of clinical and sonographic signs was significantly shorter ( p < 0.001 ) in the drainage group , with a mean difference of 6.4 days ( 95 % CI = 5.0–7.9 ; p < 0.05 ) . Conclusions Percutaneous drainage with antibiotics is a safe and effective way of treating acute perforated appendicitis . The recurrence rate for these patients is relatively low , and very often interval appendectomy is not required . For patients with periappendiceal abscess ≥ 3 cm in diameter , antibiotic therapy alone is insufficient and the recurrence rate is high PURPOSE Although many patients receive antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis , the relatively high treatment failure and recurrence rates are problematic . We assumed that patients with appendicitis and appendiceal diameters ≤ 10 mm , have better outcomes . The purpose of this prospect i ve non-r and omized study was to assess the outcomes of antibiotic therapy in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis and appendiceal diameters ≤ 10 mm . METHODS Over 2 years , we enrolled 119 patients who initially received antibiotic therapy .  The failure of antibiotic therapy was defined as the need for appendectomy and true appendicitis . Peritonitis was defined as either complicated appendicitis or intra-abdominal abscess postoperatively . We evaluated the rates of treatment failure , peritonitis , and recurrence . RESULTS Nine patients ( 7.6 % ) failed to respond to initial antibiotic therapy , and 6 had true appendicitis after subsequent surgery . Two patients had complicated appendicitis ( peritonitis ) , but no patient displayed intra-abdominal abscess postoperatively . During a median follow-up period months of 14 months , 14 patients ( 12.7 % ) experienced recurrence . CONCLUSIONS Antibiotic therapy without surgery may be a safe treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis in select patients with appendiceal diameters ≤ 10 mm Introduction : The management approach for acute appendicitis has been challenged in recent years , with numerous r and omized controlled trials demonstrating that antibiotics/conservative management is an efficacious treatment , with lower complication rates . Methods : A national survey of all consultant general surgeons evaluating their practice s was performed . Reasons for changed practice s , choice of antibiotics and follow-up investigations were evaluated . In addition , the role of interval appendicectomy and conservative management in the pediatric population was also assessed . Results : The response rate for this survey was 74.7 % ( n = 74/99 ) . Over one-fifth ( n = 17 , 22.9 % ) routinely treat acute appendicitis conservatively , while another 14.8 % ( n = 11 ) consider this approach in selected cases . Main reasons for modified practice s included the presence of inflammatory phlegmon ( 75 % ) , delayed presentation ( 64 % ) , and recent evidence -based medicine developments ( 46 % ) . Co-amoxiclav/clavulanic acid was the most popular antibiotic for conservative management ( 53 % ) . Alternatively , combinations of antibiotics were also utilized . One-third felt interval appendicectomy was warranted , while one-fifth supported conservative management in the paediatric setting . The overwhelming majority ( > 95 % ) advocate follow-up colonoscopy ± computed tomography in any patient aged > 40 years managed conservatively . Conclusion : Considerable variation in management of uncomplicated appendicitis  remains in Irel and despite growing evidence suggesting that the non-operative approach is safe . Reasons for adopting a conservative management practice have been identified and reflect the exp and ing literature on this subject BACKGROUND / PURPOSE Imaging techniques are used widely to diagnose appendicitis . However , the negative appendectomy rate remains at about 15 % . The authors assessed ultrasound-based decision making in the treatment of acute appendicitis in children . METHODS The authors prospect ively studied 165 consecutive children ( 3 to 15 years old ) evaluated for appendicitis . Diagnosis and treatment were based solely on ultrasound scan findings . Criterion for appendicitis was a diameter exceeding 6 mm . Severity was classified into 4 grade s based on the appearance of intramural appendiceal structure . Patients with grade s I or II received antibiotic therapy . Patients with grade s III or IV underwent appendectomy . RESULTS Ultrasound scan diagnosed appendicitis in 93 children ( grade I , 7 ; grade II , 17 ; grade III , 41 ; and grade IV , 28 ) . All but 2 patients with grade s I or II underwent  antibiotic therapy  without complication . All grade s III or IV patients underwent appendectomy . There was no negative appendectomy among 76 appendectomies during this period . Ultrasound-based prediction of severity was correct in 67 cases ( 88 % ) . Ultrasonography identified other pathology in 39 . CONCLUSIONS Ultrasonography in children can not only visualize all inflamed appendices but also predict severity of disease . Treatment based entirely on ultrasound scan identified patients who required surgery for severe appendicitis and permitted successful conservative treatment for mild appendicitis Uncomplicated appendicitis may resolve spontaneously or require treatment with antibiotics or appendicectomy . The aim of this r and omized trial was to compare the outcome of a non‐antibiotic management strategy with that of antibiotic therapy in uncomplicated appendicitis A prospect i ve r and omised study ( I ) was carried out on 130 children undergoing laparotomy for perforated appendicitis . The present study evaluates the therapeutic effectiveness of different antibiotic regimens in modifying the rate of post-operative complications ( intraabdominal abscess , ileus , wound infiltration or abscess ) . During the first year of this study two treatment groups were used . Group A consisted of 29 children treated with Sulfometrol/Trimethoprim ; the rate of postoperative complications was 44.8 % . Group B consisted of 36 children treated with mezlocillin , the rate of complications being 13.8 % . However , the same treatment with mezlocillin during the second year of the prospect i ve study showed an increase of this rte to 39 % ( 28 children -- group C ) . The final group of 37 children was treated during the second year with mezlocillin and metronidazole ( group D ) . The postoperative rate of complications was 10.8 % . A retrospective analysis of further 80 children ( study II ) with perforated appendicitis treated with mezlocillin and metronidazole  showed a consistent low rate of postoperative complications at 10.2 % . In 6.8 % of children studied , an operative intervention was necessary ( four cases of ileus , four wound abscesses ) . The mean postoperative hospitalisation period decreased from 22.7 days in group A to 15.2 days in group D and finally to 14 days in study II . The present study shows that an effective and persistent attenuation of the rate of postoperative complications after perforated appendicitis in children depends on an early onset of therapy and on the appropriate choice of antibiotic drugs that are effective against aerobic and anaerobic microorganisms Abstract A prospect i ve , r and omised clinical trial has been carried out to determine the effects of peritoneal drainage or prophylactic systemic antibiotics on infection after emergency appendicectomy . 329 patients were included . Drainage increased the number of days of postoperative fever significantly ( In a prospect i ve controlled study the effect of antibiotics as the only treatment in acute appendicitis was evaluated . Of 40 patients admitted with a duration of abdominal pain of less than 72 h , 20 received antibiotics intravenously for 2 days followed by oral treatment for 8 days and 20 considered as controls were r and omized to surgery . All patients treated conservatively were discharged within 2 days , except one who required surgery after 12 h because of peritonitis secondary to perforated appendicitis . Seven patients were readmitted within 1 year as a result of recurrent appendicitis and underwent surgery , when appendicitis was confirmed . The diagnostic accuracy within the operated group was 85 per cent . One patient had perforated appendicitis at operation .  Antibiotic treatment  in patients with  acute appendicitis was as effective as surgery . The patients had less pain and required less analgesia , but the recurrence rate was high BACKGROUND / PURPOSE Controversy persists in the management of perforated appendicitis with regard to antibiotic choice and duration , operative timing , drain utilization , and wound closure . For 2 decades at the authors ' institution , patients were treated with ampicillin , gentamicin , and clindamycin for 10 inpatient days , with drains in the abdomen , result ing in lower complication rates than most other published series . Managed care pressures have led to less aggressive medical management regimens with length of stay and financial factors viewed as principal outcome measures with little emphasis on clinical outcomes . In addition , there are little prospect i ve data on clinical outcomes . The authors sought to determine whether our previously documented excellent quality outcomes could be maintained when modifications aim ed at decreasing cost and length of stay in our protocol were instituted . METHODS The authors monitored prospect ively clinical outcomes in patients with perforated appendicitis treated according to their clinical practice guidelines over a 43-month period . Patients received a single antibiotic , piperacillin-tazobactam , intravenously for 10 days . They were permitted to go home with a percutaneous intravenous catheter for the final 5 days if medical and social criteria were met . Other practice s from our earlier protocol were continued , including immediate operation , placement of Penrose drains , and primary wound closure . RESULTS Of 150 patients treated on our protocol , major complications included intraabdominal abscess in 5 ( 3.3 % ) , cecal fistula in 2 ( 1.3 % ) , phlegmon in 3 ( 2.0 % ) , wound infection in 4 ( 2.7 % ) , and no small bowel obstructions requiring operation . None of these complications , nor their aggregate , were significantly more common than those reported in 373 patients treated over 11 years on the authors ' prior protocol ( chi2 , P > .05 ) . CONCLUSIONS Prospect i ve outcome analysis of our protocol shows that a single broad-spectrum antibiotic ( allowing portions of therapy to be delivered less expensively on an outpatient basis ) effectively can treat postoperative appendicitis with very few infectious complications . These outcome data provide baseline against which future protocol s can be compared . All treatment modifications aim ed at decreasing costs must be analyzed to ensure quality of care is not unduly compromised OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of nonoperative treatment of acute nonperforated appendicitis with antibiotics in children . METHODS A pilot r and omized controlled trial was performed comparing nonoperative treatment with antibiotics versus surgery for acute appendicitis in children . Patients with imaging-confirmed acute nonperforated appendicitis who would normally have had emergency appendectomy were r and omized either to treatment with antibiotics or to surgery . Follow-up was for 1 year . RESULTS Fifty patients were enrolled ; 26 were r and omized to surgery and 24 to nonoperative treatment with  antibiotics . All children in the surgery group had histopathologically confirmed acute appendicitis , and there were no significant complications in this group . Two of 24 patients in the nonoperative treatment group had appendectomy within the time of primary antibiotic treatment and 1 patient after 9 months for recurrent acute appendicitis . Another 6 patients have had an appendectomy due to recurrent abdominal pain ( n = 5 ) or parental wish ( n = 1 ) during the follow-up period ; none of these 6 patients had evidence of appendicitis on histopathological examination . CONCLUSIONS Twenty-two of 24 patients ( 92 % ) treated with antibiotics had initial resolution of symptoms . Of these 22 , only 1 patient ( 5 % ) had recurrence of acute appendicitis during follow-up . Overall , 62 % of patients have not had an appendectomy during the follow-up period . This pilot trial suggests that nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis in children is feasible and safe and that further investigation of nonoperative treatment is warranted Background The acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal emergency , and the primary treatment has been appendicectomy . Antibiotics are started preoperatively and continued postoperatively as needed . Methods This prospect i ve study was carried out at Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences , Soura , Srinagar , Kashmir , India to determine the role of antibiotics as the only treatment in acute appendicitis and the analgesic consumption needed . Total of 80 patients were included in the study with a duration of abdominal pain less than 72 h. Out of 80 patients , 40 patients received antibiotics intravenously for 2 days followed by oral treatment for 7 days , while another 40 patients considered as controls were r and omized to surgery . Results Patients managed conservatively were discharged within 3 days except for two— patients who required surgery after 12 and 24 h , respectively , because of peritonitis due to perforated appendicitis . Four patients were readmitted within 1 year as a result of recurrent appendicitis and had to undergo surgery when appendicitis was confirmed . The diagnostic accuracy within the operated group was 90 % . Two patients had perforated appendicitis at operation . Conclusion Our conclusion is that antibiotic treatment in the patients with acute appendicitis is quite effective , and these patients may not need surgery . The patients managed conservatively with antibiotics alone experience less pain and require less analgesia but have high recurrent rate
Operation with appendectomy for appendiceal mass carries a high risk of complications compared with conservative treatment or drainage .
Drainage may lower the risk of treatment failure but entails a risk of complications .
INTRODUCTION The treatment strategy for appendiceal mass is controversial , ranging from operation or image-guided drainage to conservative treatment with or without antibiotics .
The aim of this study was to assess the various treatment modalities with respect to complications and treatment failure .