Back to Search
Start Over
Meta-analysis of studies comparing conservative treatment with antibiotics and appendectomy for acute appendicitis in the adult.
- Source :
- BMC Surgery; 8/14/2019, Vol. 19 Issue 1, pN.PAG-N.PAG, 1p
- Publication Year :
- 2019
-
Abstract
- <bold>Background: </bold>Appendectomy is considered the first treatment choice for appendicitis. However, controversy exists since conservative therapy is associated with fewer complications than appendectomy for patients with acute appendicitis (AA). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes between conservative therapy and appendectomy in the management of adult AA.<bold>Methods: </bold>A literature search was performed to screen eligible clinical studies. Subgroup analyses of the uncomplicated population, complicated population and mixed population of randomized clinical trials were subsequently performed. Clinical outcomes included the overall effective rate of treatment, complication rate, relapse rate (reoperation rate) and overall length of stay (LOS).<bold>Results: </bold>Eleven trials totalling 2751 patients (conservative = 1463, appendectomy = 1288) were analysed. Patients receiving conservative treatment had a lower overall effective rate (OR: 0.11 ~ 0.17) and complication rate (OR: 0.21 ~ 0.51). The conservative group had a higher reoperation rate (5.6, 95% CI: 3.1% ~ 10.2%) than the appendectomy group (OR: 9.58 ~ 14.29). Conservative treatment was associated with a shorter overall length of stay (0.47 day, 95% CI: 0.45 ~ 0.5 day) than appendectomy.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>For both uncomplicated and complicated adult AA, non-operative management with antibiotics was associated with significantly fewer complications and a shorter length of stay but a lower effective rate and higher relapse rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 14712482
- Volume :
- 19
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- Complementary Index
- Journal :
- BMC Surgery
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 138108452
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0578-5