Single daily dosing ceftriaxone and metronidazole vs standard triple antibiotic regimen for perforated appendicitis in children: a prospective randomized trial

Introduction

Appendicitis is the most common emergency condition in children. Historically, a 3-drug regimen consisting of ampicillin, gentamicin, and clindamycin (AGC) has been used postoperatively for perforated appendicitis. A retrospective review at our institution has found single day dosing of ceftriaxone and metronidazole (CM) to be a more simple and cost-effective antibiotic strategy. Therefore, we performed a prospective, randomized trial to compare efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these 2 regimens.

Methods

After internal review board approval (IRB no. 04 12-149), children found to have perforated appendicitis at appendectomy were randomized to either once daily dosing of CM (2 total doses per day) or standard dosing of AGC (11 total doses per day). Perforation was defined as an identifiable hole in the appendix. The operative approach (laparoscopic), length of antibiotic use, and criteria for discharge were standardized for the groups. Based on our retrospective analysis using length of postoperative hospitalization as a primary end point, a sample size of 100 patients was calculated for an α of .5 and a power of 0.82.

Results

One hundred patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. On presentation, there were no differences in sex distribution, days of symptoms, temperature, or leukocyte count. There was no difference in abscess rate or wound infections between groups. The CM group resulted in significantly less antibiotic charges then the AGC group.

Conclusions

Once daily dosing with the 2-drug regimen (CM) offers a more efficient, cost-effective antibiotic management in children with perforated appendicitis without compromising infection control when compared to a traditional 3-drug regimen.     

Ultrasound-based decision making in the treatment of acute appendicitis in children

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 prospectively 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 grades based on the appearance of intramural appendiceal structure. Patients with grades I or II received antibiotic therapy. Patients with grades 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 grades I or II underwent antibiotic therapy without complication. All grades 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 cannot 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.     

Dollars and sense of interval appendectomy in children: a cost analysis

Purpose

Although initial nonoperative management of focal, perforated appendicitis in children is increasingly practiced, the need for subsequent interval appendectomy remains debated. We hypothesized that cost comparison would favor continued nonoperative management over routine interval appendectomy.

Methods

Decision tree analysis was used to compare continued nonoperative management with routine interval appendectomy after initial success with nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis. Outcome probabilities were obtained from literature review and cost estimates from the Kid's Inpatient Database. Sensitivity analyses were performed on the 2 most influential variables in the model, the probability of successful nonoperative management and the costs associated with successful observation. Monte Carlo simulation was performed using the range of cost estimates.

Results

Costs for continued nonoperative observation were estimated at $3080.78 as compared to $5034.58 for the interval appendectomy. Sensitivity analysis confirms a cost savings for nonoperative management as long as the likelihood of successful observation exceeds 60%. As the cost of nonoperative management increased, the required probability for its success also increased. Using wide distributions for both probability estimates as well as costs, Monte Carlo simulation favored continued observation in 75% of scenarios.

Conclusion

Continued nonoperative management has a cost advantage over routine interval appendectomy after initial success with conservative management in children with focal, perforated appendicitis.     

Routine interval appendectomy in children is not indicated

Background

This study evaluates outcomes for children treated without interval appendectomy (IA) after successful nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis.

Methods

A retrospective study of pediatric patients with appendicitis was performed from 12 regional acute-care hospitals from 1992 to 2004 with mean length of follow-up of 7.5 years. Main outcomes were recurrent appendicitis and cumulative length of hospital stay.

Results

The study included 6439 patients, of which 6367 (99%) underwent initial appendectomy. Seventy-two (1%) patients were initially managed nonoperatively and 11 patients had IA. Of the remaining 61 patients without IA, 5 (8%) developed recurrent appendicitis. Age, sex, type of appendicitis, and abscess drainage had no influence on recurrent appendicitis. Cumulative length of hospital stay was 6.6 days in patients without IA, 8.5 days in patients with IA, and 9.6 days in patients with recurrent appendicitis.

Conclusion

Recurrent appendicitis is rare in pediatric patients after successful nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis. Routine IA is not necessarily indicated for these children.     

Adhesive small bowel obstruction after appendectomy in children: comparison between the laparoscopic and open approach

Introduction

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common postoperative complication. Published data in the pediatric literature characterizing SBO are scant. Furthermore, the relationship between the risk of SBO for a given procedure is not well described. To evaluate these parameters, we reviewed the incidence of SBO after laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) performed at our institution.

Methods

With institutional review board approval, all patients that developed SBO after appendectomy for appendicitis from January 1998 to June 2005 were investigated. Hospital records were reviewed to identify the details of their postappendectomy SBO. The incidences of SBO after LA and OA were compared with χ² analysis using Yates correction.

Results

During the study period, 1105 appendectomies were performed: 477 OAs (8 converted to OA during laparoscopy) and 628 LAs. After OA, 7 (6 perforated appendicitis) patients later developed SBO of which 6 required adhesiolysis. In contrast, a patient with perforated appendicitis developed SBO after LA requiring adhesiolysis (P = .01). The mean time from appendectomy to the development of intestinal obstruction for the entire group was 46 ± 32 days.

Conclusions

The overall risk of SBO after appendectomy in children is low (0.7%) and is significantly related to perforated appendicitis. Small bowel obstruction after LA appears statistically less common than OA. Laparoscopic appendectomy remains our preferred approach for both perforated and nonperforated appendectomy.     

Appendiceal fecalith is associated with early perforation in pediatric patients

Purpose

A fecalith is a fecal concretion that can obstruct the appendix leading to acute appendicitis. We hypothesized that the presence of a fecalith would lead to an earlier appendiceal perforation.

Methods

Between January 2001 and December 2005, the charts of all patients younger than 18 years old who underwent appendectomy at our institution were reviewed. Duration of symptoms and timing between presentation and operation were noted along with radiologic, operative, and pathologic findings.

Results

There were 388 patients who met the study criteria. A fecalith was present in 31% of patients (n = 121). The appendix was perforated in 57% of patients who had a fecalith vs 36% in patients without a fecalith (P < .001). The overall rate of interval appendectomies was 12%. A fecalith was present on the initial radiologic studies of 36% of the patients who had interval appendectomies, and the appendix was perforated significantly sooner in these patients when compared to those without a fecalith (91 vs 150 hours; P = .036).

Conclusion

The presence of fecalith is associated with earlier and higher rates of appendiceal perforation in pediatric patients with acute appendicitis. An expedient appendectomy should therefore be performed in the pediatric patient with a radiologic evidence of fecalith.     

Postoperative bowel obstruction after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children: a 15-year experience

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to determine and evaluate the incidence of postoperative bowel obstruction (PBO) after laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children.

Material and Methods

The medical files of children who have undergone an appendectomy, either via the laparoscopic or open approach, at our department from 1992 until 2007 were reviewed. Collected data included age at appendectomy, initial surgical approach, time interval to PBO, and type of definitive treatment. The incidences of PBO after laparoscopic and open appendectomy were compared with the χ² analysis.

Results

From the 1684 children who were found, 1371 had nonperforated appendicitis and 313 had perforated appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 954 patients of the nonperforated group and in 221 of the perforated group. Open appendectomy was performed in 417 and 92 patients of the 2 groups, respectively. Overall, the incidence of PBO development was 2.2%. In the laparoscopic appendectomy population, a significantly low incidence of 1.19% of PBO development was detected, compared with the 4.51% of the open appendectomy group (P < .0001).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy diminishes the potential of PBO development. The overall incidence of PBO is not related to the severity of the disease but only to the initial operative approach.     

Antibiotics and appendicitis in the pediatric population: an American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee systematic review

Objective

The aim of the study was to review evidence-based data regarding the use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis in children.

Data Source

Data were obtained from PubMed, MEDLINE, and citation review.

Study Selection

We conducted a literature search using “appendicitis” combined with “antibiotics” with children as the target patient population. Studies were selected based on relevance for the following questions:

(1)

What perioperative antibiotics should be used for pediatric patients with nonperforated appendicitis?

(2)

For patients with perforated appendicitis treated with appendectomy:

a.

What perioperative intravenous antibiotics should be used?

b.

How long should perioperative intravenous antibiotics be used?

c.

Should oral antibiotics be used?

(3)

For patients with perforated appendicitis treated with initial nonoperative management, what antibiotics should be used in the initial management?

Results

Children with nonperforated appendicitis should receive preoperative, broad-spectrum antibiotics. In children with perforated appendicitis who had undergone appendectomy, intravenous antibiotic duration should be based on clinical criteria. Furthermore, broad-spectrum, single, or double agent therapy is as equally efficacious as but is more cost-effective than triple agent therapy. If intravenous antibiotics are administered for less than 5 days, oral antibiotics should be administered for a total antibiotic course of 7 days. For children with perforated appendicitis who did not initially undergo an appendectomy, the duration of broad-spectrum, intravenous antibiotics should be based on clinical symptoms.

Conclusions

Current evidence supports the use of guidelines as described above for antibiotic therapy in children with acute and perforated appendicitis.     

Outcome of laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in children

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic (LA) vs open appendectomy (OA) in patients with perforated appendicitis in our center.

Methods

Retrospective review from July 2002 to April 2007 (institutional review board-approved), evaluating 281 patients with perforated appendicitis based on surgical approach. We compared demographics, mean operative time, length of stay (LOS), infectious complications, and follow-up in patients with OA (n = 213) and LA (n = 68).

Results

Laparoscopic appendectomy patients were significantly older (12 vs 9.4 years), heavier (51.8 vs 36.6 kg) and more frequently girls (47.8% vs 34.3%). Mean operative time was longer in LA (72.6 vs 50.2 minutes). Median LOS was 5 days in LA and 6 days in OA. Few patients in each group required a drainage procedure for a persistent abscess (LA 4.4%, OA 4.7%; P = 1.000). Laparoscopic appendectomy patients had fewer wound infections (1.5% vs 9.5%; P = .034), and less follow-up visits were needed (>2 clinic visits 4.5% vs 16.4%; P = .013).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic appendectomy has a shorter median LOS, a trend toward less postoperative infectious complications, and fewer clinic visits than OA, which makes it a safe and effective procedure for patients with perforated appendicitis.     

Early decisions in perforated appendicitis in children: lessons from a study of nonoperative management

Background

In nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis, some children do not respond to treatment. This study sought early identifiers of failure to help in surgical decision making.

Methods

Fifty-eight patients with computed tomographic (CT)-proven perforated appendicitis were treated according to a nonoperative protocol. Patients who recovered were considered “successes;” those who did not improve underwent appendectomy and were scored as “failures” of nonoperative treatment.

Results

Thirty-six (62%) of 58 patients responded to treatment and 22 (38%) failed. Three parameters distinguished the 2 groups: the number of band forms on the admission white blood cell count, the body temperature response after 24 hours of treatment, and the areas of the abdomen involved in the CT scan. Patients in whom nonoperative treatment failed stayed in the hospital longer (17 vs 9 days) and had more complications (46% vs 0%).

Conclusions

Because failure of nonoperative management is associated with a high complication rate, it is important to make an early decision about appendectomy. Persistence of fever after 24 hours of treatment, bandemia on admission, and multisector involvement on CT scan identify most patients who fail nonoperative management. When combined with clinical judgment, these are useful indicators to guide early decisions.     

Quality of life assessment between laparoscopic appendectomy at presentation and interval appendectomy for perforated appendicitis with abscess: analysis of a prospective randomized trial

Purpose

The current study examined the impact of immediate laparoscopic surgery vs nonoperative initial management followed by interval appendectomy for appendicitis with abscess on child and family psychosocial well-being.

Methods

After obtaining Internal Review Board approval, 40 patients presenting with a perforated appendicitis and a well-formed abscess were randomized to surgical condition. Parents were asked to complete child quality of life and parenting stress ratings at presentation, at 2 weeks postadmission, and at approximately 12 weeks postadmission (2 weeks postoperation for the interval appendectomy group).

Results

Children in the interval arm experienced trends toward poorer quality of life at 2 and 12 weeks postadmission. However, no group differences in parenting stress were observed at 2 weeks postoperation. At 12 weeks postadmission, participants in the interval condition demonstrated significant impairment in both frequency and difficulty of problems contributing to parenting distress.

Conclusion

Families experience significant parenting distress related to the child's functioning and disruption in the child's quality of life that may be because of the delay in fully resolving the child's medical condition. In addition, parents experience negative consequences to their own stress as a result of the delay before the child's appendectomy.     

Failure in the nonoperative management of pediatric ruptured appendicitis: predictors and consequences

Introduction

The initial nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis fails in 15% to 25% of children. These children have complications and increased hospitalization. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of failure.

Methods

Children with perforated appendicitis treated with antibiotics and intent for nonoperative management over a 4-year period were reviewed. Seventy-five children were identified and included in the study. Failure was defined as undergoing appendectomy before the initially planned interval.

Results

Nine (12%) of the patients required appendectomy sooner than initially planned. Age, presenting symptoms, physical examination findings, and white blood cell (WBC) count were similar in both success and failure groups. Absence of abscess and presence of appendicolith were both predictors of failure in a multivariate analysis, which included the presence of small bowel obstruction. The failed group had a longer median total length of stay (18 days [range, 4-67] vs 8 days [range, 4-31]; P = .002) and underwent 3 times as many computed tomography scans as successes (3 [range, 2-7] vs 1 [range, 0-5]; P < .001).

Conclusion

Lack of abscess and presence of an appendicolith predict failure of nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis in children even when the effect of small bowel obstruction is accounted for. Children with these characteristics may benefit from alternative management strategies.     

Accuracy of computed tomography in predicting appendiceal perforation

Background

Some surgeons use nonoperative management with or without interval appendectomy for patients who present with perforated appendicitis. These strategies depend on accurately delineating perforation by computed tomography (CT). Since 2005, our institution has used an evidence-based definition for perforation as a hole in the appendix or fecalith in the abdomen. This has been shown to clearly separate those with a high risk of abscess from those without. To quantify the ability of CT to identify which patients would meet these criteria for perforation, we tested 6 surgeons and 2 radiologists who evaluated blinded CT scans.

Methods

A junior and senior surgical residents, 2 staff interventional radiologists, and 4 attending pediatric surgeons with 3 to 30 years of experience reviewed 200 CT scans of pediatric patients who had undergone a laparoscopic appendectomy. All CT scans were reviewed electronically, and the reviewers were blinded to the results, outcome, and intraoperative findings. None of the patients had a well-formed abscess on CT. The reviewers were asked to decide only on perforated or nonperforated appendicitis according to our intraoperative definition. Clinical admission data were reviewed and compared between groups.

Results

In total, the reviewers were correct 72% of the time with an overall sensitivity of 62% and a specificity of 81%. The overall positive predictive value was 67%, and the negative predictive value was 77%.

Conclusions

This study shows that in the absence of a well-formed abscess, the triage of patient care based on a preoperative diagnosis of perforation from CT may be imprudent and subject a portion of the population to an unnecessarily prolonged course of care.     

An evidence-based definition for perforated appendicitis derived from a prospective randomized trial

Purpose

Appendicitis is the most common urgent condition in general surgery, and yet there is no evidence-based definition for perforation. Therefore, all retrospective data published on perforated appendicitis are unreliable because of an ill-defined denominator. For approximately 2 years beginning in April 2005, we performed a prospective randomized trial investigating 2 different antibiotic regimens for perforated appendicitis. During this study, we strictly defined perforation as a hole in the appendix or a fecalith in the abdomen. Before this prospective study, perforation was staff surgeon opinion. We investigated the abscess rates in both the perforated and nonperforated appendicitis populations before and during the study to determine if our definition was safe and that there was not an increased risk of abscess formation in patients treated as nonperforated.

Methods

Records of all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis during the immediate 2 years before using the definition were compared to those treated in the 2 years after the definition was implemented. Interval and incidental appendectomies were ruled out. The postoperative abscess rate (when perforation was not defined) was compared to the abscess rate of those for whom perforation was strictly defined.

Results

There were 292 patients treated for acute nonperforated appendicitis in the 2 years before the definition and 388 patients after the definition. There were 131 patients treated for perforated appendicitis before the definition and 161 after the definition was implemented. The abscess rate in those with perforated appendicitis increased from 14% to 18% after the definition was used. However, after the definition began to be used, the abscess rate for those patients treated as nonperforated decreased from 1.7% to 0.8%.

Conclusions

Defining perforation as a hole in the appendix or a fecalith in the abdomen is effective in identifying the patients at risk for postoperative abscess formation. Application of these criteria would allow substantial reduction in therapy for patients with purulent or gangrenous appendicitis who do not possess the same abscess risk. These data outline the first evidence-based definition of perforation.     

Matched analysis of nonoperative management vs immediate appendectomy for perforated appendicitis

Background

The role of nonoperative therapy vs immediate appendectomy in the management of children with perforated appendicitis remains undefined. The objective of this study was to rigorously compare these management options in groups of patients with matched clinical characteristics.

Methods

Multicenter case-control study was conducted from 1998 to 2003. We compared patients treated nonoperatively vs those undergoing appendectomy to identify differences in 12 clinical parameters. We then generated a second control group of patients matched for these variables and compared the following outcomes in these clinically similar groups: complication rate, abscess rate, and length of stay (LOS). Analysis was performed according to intention-to-treat principles, using χ², Fisher exact, and Student t tests.

Results

The only significant difference between patients treated nonoperatively and those treated by appendectomy was the duration of pain on presentation (6.8 vs 3.1 days of pain).We created a second control group of patients undergoing immediate appendectomy matched on duration of pain on presentation to patients treated nonoperatively. These groups continued to be clinically comparable for the other 11 parameters. Compared to this matched control group, the nonoperative group had fewer complications (19% vs 43%, P < .01), fewer abscesses (4% vs 24%, P < .01), and a trend for shorter LOS (6.5 ± 5.7 vs 8.8 ± 6.7 days, P = .08).

Conclusions

When nonoperative management for perforated appendicitis was studied using appropriately matched clinical controls, we found that it resulted in a lower complication rate and shorter LOS in the subset of patients presenting with a long duration of pain. Our data suggest that nonoperative management should be prospectively evaluated in children with perforated appendicitis presenting with a history of pain exceeding 5 days.     

Predictive value of white blood cell count and C-reactive protein in children with appendicitis

Background/Purpose

Few studies have addressed the predictive value of white blood cells (WBCs) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at different cutoff values in appendicitis. Our purpose was to determine the cutoff values for WBC and CRP at different periods during clinical evolution of appendicitis and to establish their use for the diagnosis of appendicitis and differentiation of simple from perforated appendicitis.

Methods

We studied 198 patients operated on for appendicitis, which were further divided into 4 subgroups according to the time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed for CRP and WBC; the best cutoff points were used to calculate the sensitivity and specificity to discriminate patients with and without appendicitis and patients with simple and perforated appendicitis.

Results

White blood cell and CRP individually and together had a high sensitivity to differentiate patients with and without appendicitis. The specificity of WBC and CRP taken individually and together to differentiate patients with simple and perforated appendicitis was high, but the sensitivity was low.

Conclusions

White blood cell and CRP could be used to support the clinical diagnosis of appendicitis, and, depending on the time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis, to differentiate patients with and without appendicitis and discriminate simple from perforated appendicitis.     

The optimal initial management of children with suspected appendicitis: a decision analysis

Background/purpose

As abdominal imaging has improved, the use of computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) for evaluating children with suspected appendicitis has increased. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal management strategy for evaluating children with suspected appendicitis given the current accuracy of abdominal imaging.

Methods

Decision analysis was used to evaluate 5 management strategies: discharge, observation, CT, US, and appendectomy. Probabilities and time variables were obtained from publications and a chart review. Each approach was evaluated for its impact on length of stay, hospital charges, cost effectiveness and its capacity to minimize perforation and avoid negative appendectomy (risk-benefit).

Results

Discharge was preferred when the probability of appendicitis was low (<0.09 to <0.47), imaging when in an intermediate range and surgery when high (>0.61 to >0.91). A role for observation was found only when the anticipated time of inpatient observation was brief (<9 hours). Although CT was more expensive than US, CT was more cost effective for preventing negative appendectomy and perforation and achieved a better risk-benefit.

Conclusions

CT has an important role in the management of suspected appendicitis. Among children with a low or high likelihood of appendicitis, the cost of imaging tests required to prevent the complications of appendicitis is high.     

Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children using a clinical practice guideline

Purpose

In October 2000, our institution implemented a clinical practice guideline (CPG) utilizing selective computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound scan (US) for the evaluation of children with suspected appendicitis. The authors sought to determine surgical outcomes and diagnostic accuracy in the CPG period.

Methods

The authors retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients evaluated under the CPG at their institution between January 1 and December 31, 2001. Depending on a patient’s clinical presentation, the CPG recommends immediate surgery or further evaluation with CT or US. CPG patients were identified if they received an appendectomy or a CT or US for suspected appendicitis. Negative appendectomy and perforation rates, as well as admissions for inpatient observation were compared with control patients treated for suspected appendicitis at our hospital in 1997, before frequent utilization of imaging studies.

Results

In the CPG period, 571 patients were evaluated for acute appendicitis, with 272 undergoing an appendectomy. Whereas 513 patients (90%) received a CT or US, only 34 patients (6%) were admitted to the surgical service for serial examinations. Patients with a histologically normal appendix decreased from 27 of 255 (10.6%) in 1997 to 15 of 272 (5.5%) in 2001 (P = .03). Fifty-seven patients (22.2%) in 2001 had a perforated appendix compared with 65 (28.5%) in 1997 (P = .11). The CPG, incorporating clinical judgment and selected imaging, had a sensitivity of 98.8%, a specificity of 95.2%, and positive and negative predictive values of 94.4% and 99.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

A clinical practice guideline selectively utilizing CT and US is highly accurate in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, minimizing the need for inpatient admission for serial examinations.     

Is it necessary to drain all postoperative fluid collections after appendectomy for perforated appendicitis?

Purpose

Children treated for perforated appendicitis can have significant morbidity. Management often includes looking for and draining postoperative fluid collections. We sought to determine if drainage hastens recovery.

Methods

Children with perforated appendicitis treated with appendectomy from 2006 to 2009 were reviewed. Patients with postoperative fluid that was drained were compared with patients with undrained fluid with regard to preoperative features and postoperative outcomes. Statistical analyses included paired Student's t tests, Mann-Whitney U test, and linear regression.

Results

Five hundred ninety-one patients were reviewed. Seventy-one patients had postoperative fluid, of whom 36 had a drainage procedure and 35 did not. There was no significant difference in white blood cell count at the time of assessment for drainage (16.4 ± 4.0 vs 14.6 ± 4.9, P = .14), days with fever (3.5 ± 3.0 vs 2.9 ± 2.5, P = .35), or readmission rate (19% vs 31%, P = .28). After multivariate linear regression, larger fluid volumes were associated with prolonged length of stay (LOS) (P = .03). For fluid collections between 30-100 mL, there was no significant difference in LOS between the drain and no-drain groups (9.8 ± 3.5 vs 10.9 ± 5.2 days, P = .51).

Conclusion

After appendectomy for perforated appendicitis, larger postoperative fluid collections are associated with prolonged LOS. Drainage of collections less than 100 mL may not hasten recovery.     

Laparoscopic drainage of intraabdominal abscess after appendectomy: an alternative to laparotomy in cases not amenable to percutaneous drainage

Purpose

Postoperative abscesses after appendectomy occur in 3% to 20% of cases and are more common in cases of perforated appendicitis. Smaller abscesses are often amenable to antibiotic therapy, but surgical drainage remains the mainstay of treatment for larger collections. Surgical options generally include percutaneous drainage and open laparotomy. Laparoscopic drainage of these abscesses has not been well characterized in the pediatric population.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe our experience with laparoscopic drainage of postappendectomy abscesses that were not amenable to percutaneous drainage.

Methods

This study is a retrospective review of all pediatric patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis at a tertiary pediatric medical center during a 4-year period (2006-2009). The review focuses on patients who developed abscesses after appendectomy, were unable to undergo percutaneous drainage, and were treated with laparoscopic abscess drainage.

Results

Twelve patients (7 male and 5 female) underwent laparoscopic drainage of postappendectomy abscesses. The mean age was 8.5 years old (range, 3-14 years). A clinical diagnosis of postoperative abscess was made when fevers, pain, and leukocytosis persisted despite broad-spectrum antibiotics. Computed tomography was performed in all patients. Abscesses ranged between 3 and 11 cm in size. The mean length of time between initial appendectomy and drainage procedure was 10 days. There were no complications specifically related to the laparoscopic drainage procedure. The mean length of the drainage procedure was 77 minutes (range, 30-196 minutes). The mean hospital length of stay after laparoscopic drainage was 6.5 days (range, 3-13 days) with patients maintained on intravenous antibiotics until afebrile and without leukocytosis.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic drainage is a safe and effective alternative for intraabdominal abscesses that occur after laparoscopic appendectomy. We recommend it as an alternative to open laparotomy when percutaneous drainage is not an option.