Search

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of abdominal drainage after laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with complicated appendicitis. Methods: Patients with acute appendicitis undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy at two hospitals between January 2014 and December 2018 were retrospectively included. Complicated appendicitis was defined as the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade ≥ II. The patients were classified according to the AAST grade and the indwelling of abdominal drainage. The postoperative surgical outcomes and recovery were compared among patient groups to evaluate the impact of abdominal drainage for patients with complicated appendicitis undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Results: A total of 1241 patients was retrospectively included. Among them, there were 820 patients with simple appendicitis (AAST grade I) and 421 patients with complicated appendicitis (AAST grade ≥ II). For complicated appendicitis, the drainage group (N = 192) tended to harbor more overall complications, intra-abdominal abscess formation, time to resume a soft diet, and the postoperative length of hospitalization (P = 0.0000 for all). Multivariate logistic regression confirmed that abdominal drainage increased the risk of overall complications [Odds ratio (OR) 2.439; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.597–3.726; P ≤ 0.0001] and failed to decrease the risk of intra-abdominal abscess formation (OR 1.655; 95% CI 0.487–5.616; P = 0.4193). Multivariate linear regression analysis also showed that the drainage group harbored longer postoperative length of hospitalization (Coefficients: 20.697; 95% CI 15.251–26.143; P < 0.0001) and time to resume a soft diet (Coefficients: 45.899; 95% CI 34.502–57.297; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Abdominal drainage did not prevent overall complications in patients with complicated appendicitis; paradoxically, it delayed the convalescence. Our results discourage the routine use of abdominal drainage and suggest that abdominal drainage should be performed sparingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Numerous epidemiological studies have compared outcomes between laparoscopic appendectomies (LA) and open appendectomies (OA); however, few studies have assessed the efficacy of LA specifically in a low-income population (LIP). Methods: We analyzed the trends in the utilization and outcomes of LA versus OA in an LIP in Taiwan using data from the National Health Insurance (NHI) Research Database. Results: Steady temporal growth trends were observed for the patients who underwent LA in both the LIP and general population (GP); however, in each study year, the proportion of LIP patients who underwent LA was lower than the proportion of GP patients who underwent the procedure. The LIP patients were more susceptible to payment policies than the GP patients; thus, more attention should be paid to vulnerable patient populations when formulating and revising NHI payment policies. Compared with OAs, LAs were associated with a slightly higher rate of routine patient discharges and a lower rate of in-hospital complications (1.48 % vs. 3.76 %, p < 0.05). The rate of readmission for complications was lower in patients after LA than in patients after OA (1.64 % vs. 3.89 %, p < 0.05). The overall case-fatality rate of LIP patients who underwent LA was lower than that of those who underwent OA. LA was correlated with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) compared with OA (3.80 ± 0.08 vs. 5.51 ± 0.11, p < 0.05). The average hospital cost for LA was slightly less than that for OA (1178 ± 13 vs. 1191 ± 19 USD, p < 0.05). A higher percentage of patients who underwent OA required an LOS longer than 14 days compared to patients who underwent LA (7.73 % vs. 1.97 %, p < 0.05). Regarding hospital costs and LOS, LA showed significant advantages over OA in the subpopulations of male patients, patients 45 years old and older, patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores of two or more, and patients with complicated cases of appendicitis. Conclusion: The LIP patients benefited more from the LA approach than the OA approach in the treatment of appendicitis, especially regarding LOS, in-hospital complications, in-hospital mortality, and routine discharge rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This paper presents an epidemiologic study of appendicitis in Taiwan over a twelve-year period. An analysis of the incidence in the low-income population (LIP) is included to explore the effects of lower socioeconomic status on appendicitis. Methods: We analyzed the epidemiological features of appendicitis in Taiwan using data from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 2000 to 2011. All cases diagnosed as appendicitis were enrolled. Results: The overall incidences of appendicitis, primary appendectomy, and perforated appendicitis were 107.76, 101.58, and 27.20 per 100,000 per year, respectively. The highest incidence of appendicitis was found in persons aged 15 to 29 years; males had higher rates of appendicitis than females at all ages except for 70 years and older. Appendicitis rates were 11.76 % higher in the summer than in the winter months. A multilevel analysis with hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) revealed that male patients, younger patients (aged ≤14 years), and elderly patients (aged ≥60 years) had a higher risk of perforated appendicitis; among adults, the incidence increased with age. Moreover, the risk of perforation was higher in patients with one or more comorbidities. LIP patients comprised 1.25 % of the total number of patients with appendicitis from 2000 to 2011. The overall incidence of appendicitis was 34.99 % higher in the LIP than in the normal population (NP), and the incidence of perforated appendicitis was 40.40 % higher in the LIP than in the NP. After multivariate adjustment, the adjusted hospital costs and length of hospital stay (LOS) for the LIP patients were higher than those for the NP patients. Conclusions: Appendicitis and appendectomy in Taiwan had similar overall incidences, seasonality patterns, and declining trends compared to numerous previous studies. Compared to NP patients, LIP patients had a higher risk of appendicitis, longer LOS and higher hospital costs as a result of appendectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although numerous epidemiological studies on appendicitis have been conducted worldwide, only a few studies have paid attention to the effect of socioeconomic status on appendicitis, particularly studies focusing on the low-income population (LIP). Methods: We analyzed the epidemiological features of appendicitis in Taiwan using data from the National Health Insurance Research Database from 2003 to 2011. All cases diagnosed as appendicitis were enrolled. Results: Between 2003 and 2011, 2,916 patients from the LIP and 209,206 patients from the normal population (NP) were diagnosed with appendicitis. Our finding revealed that the ratios of comorbidities, complicated appendicitis, and readmissions in LIP patients were slightly higher than those of NP patients. LIP patients were more likely to live in suburban and rural areas, and hence a higher proportion of them were hospitalized in a district or regional hospital compared with NP patients. The crucially finding was that the overall incidence ratios of appendicitis, acute appendicitis, and perforated appendicitis in the LIP were substantially higher than those in the NP (36.25%, 35.33%, and 37.28%, respectively). The mean LOS in LIP patients was longer than that of NP patients. The overall case-fatality ratio of appendectomy in the LIP was higher when compared with the NP (0.41% versus 0.12%, p < 0.05). We also observed that appendicitis was occurred frequently in male patients, with a higher incidence for those aged 15-29 years in both the LIP and NP. The incidences of incidental appendectomy showed a decreasing trend in both the LIP and NP. Finally, a valuable discovery was that the total hospital cost was comparable between the laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA) (1,178 ± 13 USD versus 1,191 ± 19 USD, p < 0.05) in LIP patients because they saved more hospitalization costs than NP patients when the previous one chose the LA. Conclusion: This study confirmed that a lower socioeconomic status has significantly negative impact on the occurrence and treatment of appendicitis and appendectomy. In terms of hospital costs and LOS, LIP patients benefit more from the LA approach than they do from the OA approach in the treatment of appendicitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]