Contemporary Epidemiology of and Risk Factors Associated with Removal of a Pathologically Normal Appendix in Children with Suspected Appendicitis

BackgroundThe goal of this study was to characterize contemporary performance benchmarks and risk factors associated with negative appendectomy (NA) in children with suspected appendicitis.MethodsA multicenter retrospective cohort analysis of children undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis was performed using data from the 2016–2021 NSQIP-Pediatric Appendectomy Targeted Public Use Files. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the influence of year, age, sex, and WBC count on NA rate, and to generate rate estimates for NA based on different combinations of demographic characteristics and WBC profiles.Results100,322 patients were included from 140 hospitals. The overall NA rate was 2.4%, and rates decreased significantly during the study period (2016: 3.1% vs. 2021: 2.3%, p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, the highest risk for NA was associated with a normal WBC (<9000/mm³; OR 5.31 [95% CI: 4.87–5.80]), followed by female sex (OR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.42–1.68]) and age <5 years (OR 1.64 [95% CI 1.39, 1.94]). Model-estimated risk for NA varied significantly across demographic and WBC strata, with a 14.4-fold range in rates between subgroups with the lowest and highest predicted risk (males 13–17 years with elevated WBC [1.1%] vs. females 3–4 years with normal WBC [15.8%]).ConclusionsContemporary NA rates have decreased over time, however NA risk remains high in children without a leukocytosis, particularly for girls and children <5 years of age. These data provide contemporary performance benchmarks for NA in children with suspected appendicitis and identify high-risk populations where further efforts to mitigate NA risk should be targeted.Level of EvidenceIII.     

Cardiovascular risk assessment tools: A scoping review

ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to describe cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment methods and to identify evidence-based practice recommendations when dealing with population at risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.Review methods and data sourcesA literature review following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodology was conducted. By using appropriate key terms, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane Library, Dialnet, ENFISPO, Medigraphic, ScienceDirect, Cuiden, and Lilacs databases. A complementary search on websites related to the area of interest was conducted. Articles published in English or Spanish in peer-review journals between 2010 and 2017. Critical appraisal for methodological quality was conducted. Data was extracted using ad-hoc tables and qualitatively synthesized.ResultsAfter eliminating duplicates, 55 325 records remained, and 1432 records were selected for screening. Out of these, 88 full-text articles were selected for eligibility criteria, and finally, 67 studies were selected for this review, and 25 studies were selected for evidence synthesis. In total, 23 CVR assessment tools have been identified, pioneered by the Framingham study. Qualitative findings were grouped into four thematic areas: assessment tools and scores, CVR indicators, comparative models, and evidence-based recommendations.ConclusionsIt is necessary to adapt the instruments to the epidemiological reality of the population. The most appropriate way to estimate CVR is to choose the assessment tool that best suits individual conditions, accompanied by a comprehensive assessment of the patient. More research is required to determine a single, adequate, and reliable tool.     

Outcomes After Aortic Valve Replacement for Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Regurgitation and Normal Ejection Fraction

1. Download : Download high-res image (123KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image