Search

Background Non-operative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is an option, but omission of antibiotics from the regimen has not been tested. Methods A double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority RCT in adults with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis was designed to compare placebo with antibiotics (intravenous ertapenem followed by oral levofloxacin and metronidazole). The primary endpoint was treatment success (resolution resulting in discharge without appendicectomy within 10 days); secondary outcomes included pain scores, complications, hospital stay, and return to work. Results From May 2017 to September 2020, 72 patients with a mean(s.d.) age of 37.5 (11.1) years were recruited at five hospitals. Six were excluded after randomization (5 early consent withdrawals, 1 randomization protocol violation), 35 were assigned to receive antibiotics, and 31 to receive placebo. Enrolment challenges (including hospital pharmacy resources in an acute-care surgery setting) meant that only the lowest sample size of three predefined scenarios was achieved. The 10-day treatment success rate was 87 (95 per cent c.i. 75 to 99) per cent for placebo and 97 (92 to 100) per cent for antibiotics. This clinical difference of 10 (90 per cent c.i. −0.9 to 21) per cent was not statistically different for the primary outcome (1-sided P = 0.142), and secondary outcomes were similar. Conclusion The lack of antibiotic superiority statistically suggests that a non-inferiority trial against placebo is warranted in adults with CT-confirmed mild appendicitis. Registration number: EudraCT 2015-003634-26 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/eudract-web/index.faces), NCT03234296 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Background Contrast-enhanced CT is the reference standard used in diagnostic imaging for acute appendicitis in adults. The radiation dose has been of concern. This study aimed to assess whether a lower radiation dose would affect the diagnostic accuracy of CT. Methods This was a prospective single-centre cohort study of patients (aged over 16 years) with suspected appendicitis evaluated for enrolment in concurrent APPAC II–III trials. The diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced low- and standard-dose CT was compared with study protocols guiding imaging based on BMI; this enabled direct CT imaging comparison only in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2. The on-call CT diagnosis was compared with the final clinical diagnosis. Results Among all 856 patients investigated, the accuracy of low-dose (454 patients) and standard-dose (402 patients) CT in identifying patients with and without appendicitis was 98·0 and 98·5 per cent respectively. In patients with a BMI under 30 kg/m2, respective values were 98·2 per cent (434 patients) and 98·6 per cent (210 patients) (P = 1·000). The corresponding accuracy for differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis was 90·3 and 87·6 per cent in all patients, and 89·8 and 88·4 per cent respectively among those with a BMI below 30 kg/m2 (P = 0·663). The median radiation dose in the whole low- and standard-dose CT groups was 3 and 7 mSv respectively. In the group with BMI below 30 kg/m2, corresponding median doses were 3 and 5 mSv (P Conclusion Low- and standard-dose CT were accurate both in identifying appendicitis and in differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis. Low-dose CT was associated with a significant radiation dose reduction, suggesting that it should be standard clinical practice at least in patients with a BMI below 30 kg/m2.

Background and objective: The prevalence of bacteremia in acute appendicitis is unknown. We aimed to assess prevalence and predictive factors of bacteremia in adult patients with appendicitis. Methods: In this prospective propensity score–matched cohort study, patients were recruited as part of one single-center prospective observational study assessing appendicitis microbiology in concurrence with two randomized controlled trials on non-operative treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. All patients evaluated for enrollment in these three trials between April 2017 and December 2018 with both a confirmed diagnosis of appendicitis and available blood culture on admission were included in this study. Potential predictive factors of bacteremia (age, sex, body mass index (BMI), body temperature, C-reactive protein (CRP), leukocyte count, comorbidities, symptom duration, and appendicitis severity) were assessed. Prevalence of bacteremia was determined by all available blood cultures followed by propensity score matching using sex, age, BMI, CRP, leukocyte count, and body temperature of the patients without available blood culture. Results: Out of the 815 patients with appendicitis, 271 patients had available blood culture and the prevalence of bacteremia was 12% (n = 33). Based on propensity score estimation, the prevalence of bacteremia in the whole prospective appendicitis cohort was 11.1%. Bacteremia was significantly more frequent in complicated acute appendicitis (15%; 29/189) compared with uncomplicated acute appendicitis (5%; 4/82) (p = 0.015). Male sex (p = 0.024) and higher body temperature (p = 0.0044) were associated with bacteremia. Conclusions: Estimated prevalence of bacteremia in patients with acute appendicitis was 11.1%. Complicated appendicitis, male sex, and higher body temperature were associated with bacteremia in acute appendicitis.

Importance Antibiotics are an effective and safe alternative to appendectomy for managing uncomplicated acute appendicitis, but the optimal antibiotic regimen is not known. Objective To compare oral antibiotics with combined intravenous followed by oral antibiotics in the management of computed tomography–confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Design, Setting, and Participants The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) II multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2017 until November 2018 in 9 Finnish hospitals. A total of 599 patients aged 18 to 60 years with computed tomography–confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis were enrolled in the trial. The last date of follow-up was November 29, 2019. Interventions Patients randomized to receive oral monotherapy (n = 295) received oral moxifloxacin (400 mg/d) for 7 days. Patients randomized to receive intravenous antibiotics followed by oral antibiotics (n = 288) received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 2 days followed by oral levofloxacin (500 mg/d) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times/d) for 5 days. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was treatment success (≥65%) for both groups, defined as discharge from hospital without surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during 1-year follow-up, and to determine whether oral antibiotics alone were noninferior to intravenous and oral antibiotics, with a margin of 6% for difference. Results Among 599 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 36 [12] years; 263 [44%] women), 581 (99.7%) were available for the 1-year follow-up. The treatment success rate at 1 year was 70.2% (1-sided 95% CI, 65.8% to ∞) for patients treated with oral antibiotics and 73.8% (1-sided 95% CI, 69.5% to ∞) for patients treated with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics. The difference was −3.6% ([1-sided 95% CI, −9.7% to ∞];P = .26 for noninferiority), with the confidence limit exceeding the noninferiority margin. Conclusion and Relevance Among adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, treatment with 7 days of oral moxifloxacin compared with 2 days of intravenous ertapenem followed by 5 days of levofloxacin and metronidazole resulted in treatment success rates greater than 65% in both groups, but failed to demonstrate noninferiority for treatment success of oral antibiotics compared with intravenous followed by oral antibiotics. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT03236961; EudraCT Identifier:2015-003633-10

Long-term results support antibiotics for uncomplicated acute appendicitis as an alternative to appendectomy. To our knowledge, treatment-related long-term patient satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) are not known.To determine patient satisfaction and QOL after antibiotic therapy and appendectomy for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis.Open appendectomy vs antibiotics with intravenous ertapenem, 1 g once daily, for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin, 500 mg once daily, and metronidazole, 500 mg 3 times per day.This observational follow-up of the Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing appendectomy with antibiotics included 530 patients age 18 to 60 years with computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis who were randomized to undergo appendectomy (273 [52%]) or receive antibiotics (257 [49%]). The trial was conducted from November 2009 to June 2012; the last follow-up was May 9, 2018. The data were analyzed in February 2019.In this analysis, post hoc secondary end points of postintervention QOL (EQ-5D-5L) and patient satisfaction and treatment preference were evaluated.Of the 530 patients enrolled in the trial (appendectomy group: 273 [174 men (64%)] with a median age of 35 years; (antibiotic group: 257 [155 men (60%)] with a median age of 33 years), 423 patients (80%) were available for phone interview at a median follow-up of 7 years; 206 patients (80%) took antibiotics and 217 (79%) underwent appendectomy. Of the 206 patients taking antibiotics, 81 (39%) had undergone appendectomy. The QOL between appendectomy and antibiotic group patients was similar (median health index value, 1.0 in both groups; 95% CI, 0.86-1.0; P = .96). Patients who underwent appendectomy were more satisfied in the treatment than patients taking antibiotics (68% very satisfied, 21% satisfied, 6% indifferent, 4% unsatisfied, and 1% very unsatisfied in the appendectomy group and 53% very satisfied, 21% satisfied, 13% indifferent, 7% unsatisfied, and 6% very unsatisfied in the antibiotic group; P .001) and in a subgroup analysis this difference was based on the antibiotic group patients undergoing appendectomy. There was no difference in patient satisfaction after successful antibiotic treatment compared with appendectomy (cumulative odds ratio [COR], 7.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.3; P .36). Patients with appendectomy or with successful antibiotic therapy were more satisfied than antibiotic group patients who later underwent appendectomy (COR, 7.7; 95% CI, 4.6-12.9; P .001; COR, 9.7; 95% CI, 5.4-15.3; P .001, respectively). Of the 81 patients taking antibiotics who underwent appendectomy, 27 (33%) would again choose antibiotics as their primary treatment.In this analysis, long-term QOL was similar after appendectomy and antibiotic therapy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients taking antibiotics who later underwent appendectomy were less satisfied than patients with successful antibiotics or appendectomy.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01022567.

This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial assesses potential preintervention findings associated with primary nonresponsiveness to antibiotics in adults with uncomplicates acute appendicitis.

Background and aims Uptake of the positron emission tomography (PET) tracer 2-deoxy-2-[ 18 F]-fluoro-d- glucose ([ 18 F]FDG) into macrophages is a sensitive marker of inflammation in atherosclerosis. To assess the anti-inflammatory effects of statins, we studied whether atorvastatin therapy reduces aortic [ 18 F]FDG uptake in hypercholesterolemic mice deficient in low-density lipoprotein receptor (Ldlr), and expressing only apolipoprotein B-100 ( Ldlr −/− Apob 100/100 ). Methods Thirty-six Ldlr −/− Apob 100/100 mice were fed a high-fat diet (HFD) for 12 weeks and then allocated to receive a HFD (n = 13), chow diet (Chow, n = 12), or HFD with added atorvastatin (HFD + A, n = 11), for another 12 weeks. In addition to aortic histopathology, [ 18 F]FDG uptake was studied in vivo using PET/computed tomography (CT), and ex vivo by gamma counting of excised aorta. Results Total cholesterol levels were lower in the Chow and HFD + A groups than in the HFD group (10 ± 3.2, 23 ± 4.9 and 34 ± 9.2 mmol/l, respectively), with the Chow group also showing a lower plaque burden and lower numbers of macrophages in the lesions. Compared to the HFD group, [ 18 F]FDG uptake in the aorta (normalized for blood) was lower in the Chow group in both in vivo (2.1 ± 0.21 vs . 1.7 ± 0.25, p = 0.018) and ex vivo (5.2 ± 2.3 vs . 2.8 ± 0.87, p = 0.011) analyses, whereas atorvastatin had no effect on uptake (2.1 ± 0.42 in vivo and 3.9 ± 1.8 ex vivo ). [ 18 F]FDG uptake correlated with plasma total cholesterol levels. Conclusions Atorvastatin therapy did not show cholesterol-independent effects on inflammation in atherosclerotic lesions in Ldlr −/− Apob 100/100 mice, as determined by histology and [ 18 F]FDG PET, whereas a cholesterol-lowering diet intervention was effective.

Background An increasing amount of evidence supports antibiotic therapy for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The objective of this study was to compare the costs of antibiotics alone versus appendicectomy in treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis within the randomized controlled APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial. Methods The APPAC multicentre, non-inferiority RCT was conducted on patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Patients were assigned randomly to appendicectomy or antibiotic treatment. All costs were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis during the 1-year follow-up. The cost estimates were based on cost levels for the year 2012. Results Some 273 patients were assigned to the appendicectomy group and 257 to antibiotic treatment. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment did not require appendicectomy during the 1-year follow-up. In the operative group, overall societal costs (€5989·2, 95 per cent c.i. 5787·3 to 6191·1) were 1·6 times higher (€2244·8, 1940·5 to 2549·1) than those in the antibiotic group (€3744·4, 3514·6 to 3974·2). In both groups, productivity losses represented a slightly higher proportion of overall societal costs than all treatment costs together, with diagnostics and medicines having a minor role. Those in the operative group were prescribed significantly more sick leave than those in the antibiotic group (mean(s.d.) 17·0(8·3) (95 per cent c.i. 16·0 to 18·0) versus 9·2(6·9) (8·3 to 10·0) days respectively; P < 0·001). When the age and sex of the patient as well as the hospital were controlled for simultaneously, the operative treatment generated significantly more costs in all models. Conclusion Patients receiving antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis incurred lower costs than those who had surgery.

IntroductionBased on the epidemiological and clinical data, acute appendicitis can present either as uncomplicated or complicated. The aetiology of these different appendicitis forms remains unknown. Antibiotic therapy has been shown to be safe, efficient and cost-effective for CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Despite appendicitis being one of the most common surgical emergencies, there are very few reports on appendicitis aetiology and pathophysiology focusing on the differences between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Microbiology APPendicitis ACuta (MAPPAC) trial aims to evaluate these microbiological and immunological aspects including immune response in the aetiology of these different forms also assessing both antibiotics non-responders and appendicitis recurrence. In addition, MAPPAC aims to determine antibiotic and placebo effects on gut microbiota composition and antimicrobial resistance.Methods and analysisMAPPAC is a prospective clinical trial with both single-centre and multicentre arm conducted in close synergy with concurrent trials APPendicitis ACuta II (APPAC II) (per oral (p.o.) vs intravenous+p.o. antibiotics,NCT03236961) and APPAC III (double-blind trial placebo vs antibiotics,NCT03234296) randomised clinical trials. Based on the enrolment for these trials, patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis are recruited also to the MAPPAC study. In addition to these conservatively treated randomised patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, MAPPAC will recruit patients with uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis undergoing appendectomy. Rectal and appendiceal swabs, appendicolith, faecal and serum samples, appendiceal biopsies and clinical data are collected during the hospital stay for microbiological and immunological analyses in both study arms with the longitudinal study arm collecting faecal samples also during follow-up up to 12 months after appendicitis treatment.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland (Turku University Hospital, approval number ATMK:142/1800/2016) and the Finnish Medicines Agency. Results of the trial will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03257423

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been established at long-term follow-up with the majority of recurrences shown to occur within the first year. Overall costs of antibiotics are significantly lower compared with appendectomy at short-term follow-up, but long-term durability of these cost savings is unclear. The study objective was to compare the long-term overall costs of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial at 5 years.Methods and findingsThis multicentre, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial randomly assigned 530 adult patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis to appendectomy or antibiotic treatment at six Finnish hospitals. All major costs during the 5-year follow-up were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis. Between November 2009 and June 2012, 273 patients were randomized to appendectomy and 257 to antibiotics. The overall costs of appendectomy were 1.4 times higher (pConclusionsAt 5-year follow-up antibiotic treatment resulted in significantly lower overall costs compared with appendectomy. As the majority of appendicitis recurrences occur within the first year after the initial antibiotic treatment, these results suggest that treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis with antibiotics instead of appendectomy results in lower overall costs even at longer-term follow-up.

Based on epidemiological and clinical data acute appendicitis can present either as uncomplicated (70–80%) or complicated (20–30%) disease. Recent studies have shown that antibiotic therapy is both safe and cost-effective for a CT-scan confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. However, based on the study protocols to ensure patient safety, these randomised studies used mainly broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics requiring additional hospital resources and prolonged hospital stay. As we now know that antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis is feasible and safe, further studies evaluating optimisation of the antibiotic treatment regarding both antibiotic spectrum and shorter hospital stay are needed to evaluate antibiotics as the first-line treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. APPAC II trial is a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing per oral (p.o.) antibiotic monotherapy with intravenous (i.v.) antibiotic therapy followed by p.o. antibiotics in the treatment of CT-scan confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Adult patients with CT-scan diagnosed uncomplicated acute appendicitis will be enrolled in nine Finnish hospitals. The intended sample size is 552 patients. Primary endpoint is the success of the randomised treatment, defined as resolution of acute appendicitis resulting in discharge from the hospital without the need for surgical intervention and no recurrent appendicitis during one-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints include post-intervention complications, late recurrence of acute appendicitis after one year, duration of hospital stay, pain, quality of life, sick leave and treatment costs. Primary endpoint will be evaluated in two stages: point estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) will be calculated for both groups and proportion difference between groups with 95% CI will be calculated and evaluated based on 6 percentage point non-inferiority margin. To our knowledge, APPAC II trial is the first randomised controlled trial comparing per oral antibiotic monotherapy with intravenous antibiotic therapy continued by per oral antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The APPAC II trial aims to add clinical evidence on the debated role of antibiotics as the first-line treatment for a CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis as well as to optimise the non-operative treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03236961, retrospectively registered on the 2nd of August 2017.

IntroductionRecent studies show that antibiotic therapy is safe and feasible for CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Spontaneous resolution of acute appendicitis has already been observed over a hundred years ago. In CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute diverticulitis (left-sided appendicitis), studies have shown no benefit from antibiotics compared with symptomatic treatment, but this shift from antibiotics to symptomatic treatment has not yet been widely implemented in clinical practice. Recently, symptomatic treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been demonstrated in a Korean open-label study. However, a double-blinded placebo-controlled study to illustrate the role of antibiotics and spontaneous resolution of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is still lacking.Methods and analysisThe APPAC III (APPendicitis ACuta III) trial is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority randomised study comparing antibiotic therapy with placebo in the treatment CT scan-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis aiming to evaluate the role of antibiotics in the resolution of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Adult patients (18–60 years) with CT scan-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis (the absence of appendicolith, abscess, perforation and tumour) will be enrolled in five Finnish university hospitals.Primary endpoint is success of the randomised treatment, defined as resolution of acute appendicitis resulting in discharge from the hospital without surgical intervention within 10 days after initiating randomised treatment (treatment efficacy). Secondary endpoints include postintervention complications, recurrent symptoms after treatment up to 1 year, late recurrence of acute appendicitis after 1 year, duration of hospital stay, sick leave, treatment costs and quality of life. A decrease of 15 percentage points in success rate is considered clinically important difference. The superiority of antibiotic treatment compared with placebo will be analysed using Fisher’s one-sided test and CI will be calculated for proportion difference.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Turku University Hospital and the Finnish Medicines Agency (FIMEA). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.Trial registration numberNCT03234296; Pre-results.

OBJECTIVE To compare diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced low-dose computed tomography (CT) accomplished in the OPTICAP trial phantom phase to standard CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. BACKGROUND Increasing use of CT as the gold standard in diagnosing acute appendicitis has raised concerns regarding radiation exposure. Unenhanced low-dose CT protocols have shown similar diagnostic accuracy with standard CT for diagnosing appendicitis. To our knowledge, there are no other trials in which the same patient with suspected acute appendicitis underwent both standard and low-dose CT allowing interpatient comparison. METHODS OPTICAP is an interpatient protocol sequence randomized noninferiority single-center trial performed at Turku University Hospital between November, 2015 and August, 2016. Sixty patients with suspected acute appendicitis and body mass index

The aim was to evaluate effects of voltage, noise input (NI) and iterative reconstruction (IR) on radiation dose and image quality in order to establish a contrast enhanced low-dose protocol for assessment of acute appendicitis. An anthropomorphic abdominal phantom mimicking contrast enhanced abdomen was scanned with 80, 100 and 120 kV, standard and strong IR and 11 NIs (66 protocols). A total of 14 test tubes of increasing iodine dilutions and one tube with an appendicolith were evaluated within the phantom. The dose, HUs, noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and figure of merit (FOM) were determined. Visual quality scores were assessed by two readers. A clinically used voltage-IR combination (120 kV, standard IR) was used as a reference. Overall, 100 kV with standard IR (p = 0.002) and 80 kV with both IRs (p < 0.001) showed higher CNR than the reference, but noise was most pronounced at 80 kV (p < 0.001). The highest FOM was found in the 100 kV protocols (p < 0.001). The reference and 100 kV with standard IR had highest image quality scores, where the 100 kV protocol enabled a distinct dose reduction. Lowering the voltage seems to be a more favorable tool than IR changes in optimizing the dose in contrast enhanced abdominal CT. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01022567.

Uptake of the positron emission tomography (PET) tracer 2-deoxy-2-[Thirty-six LdlrTotal cholesterol levels were lower in the Chow and HFD + A groups than in the HFD group (10 ± 3.2, 23 ± 4.9 and 34 ± 9.2 mmol/l, respectively), with the Chow group also showing a lower plaque burden and lower numbers of macrophages in the lesions. Compared to the HFD group, [Atorvastatin therapy did not show cholesterol-independent effects on inflammation in atherosclerotic lesions in Ldlr