View clinical trials related to Appendicitis.
Filter by:This study evaluates the ability of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to improve the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children compared to conventional ultrasound.
After appendix has been removed for perforated appendicitis, patients will receive postoperative antibiotics. In the last 5 years, the literature has transitioned from a 3 -drug therapy to 2-drug therapy. Now there is a recent literature suggesting a single-drug therapy may be safe and adequate. In fact, using zosyn (piperacillin-tazobactam) as a single-drug therapy, there are additional benefits of simplicity, compliance, and lower infectious complications. Currently surgeons are already using both 2-drug regimen (ceftriaxone/metronidazole) and single-drug regimen (zosyn) interchangeable as both are FDA approved and regulated antibiotics for intra-abdominal infection. There is a clear need to compare outcomes between these two options.
A laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) was first reported by Semm in 1983. Since then, its advantages, such as the aesthetic appearance of the wound, less postoperative pain, and faster recovery which facilitates early discharge, have been highlighted, and the number of procedures performed has been continuously increasing.
Appendicectomy has been the treatment of acute appendicitis for over a hundred years. Appendicectomy, however, includes operative and postoperative risks despite being a routine procedure. Several studies have proved promising results of the safety and efficiency of antibiotics in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. The previous APPAC study by the investigators, published in 2015 in the Journal of American Medical Association, also proved promising results with 73% of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis treated successfully with antibiotics. None of the patients initially treated with antibiotics that later had appendectomy had major complications. The results of the APPAC trial suggest that CT proven uncomplicated acute appendicitis is not a surgical emergency and antibiotic therapy is a safe first-line treatment option. Reducing unnecessary appendectomies has also been shown to lead to significant economic savings. On the other hand, antibiotic therapies have been shown to have an effect on the normal gut microbiota and are considered an increasing global health threat underlining the importance of evaluating both short- and long-term effects of the antimicrobial treatment in old and new indications. The aims of this randomized prospective study are: 1. To evaluate the possible role and differences in the microbiological etiology of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis. 2. To determine the effects of both antibiotic and placebo treatment on the composition of gut microbiota, and to evaluate how it recovers after the appendicitis-related antimicrobial treatment (AMT) 3. To evaluate the effects of the duration of the hospital stay on the AMR reservoir of the gut microbiota.
Laparoscopic (key-hole) appendicectomy is a minimally invasive procedure when compared to open large bowel resection, but is still associated with a significant amount of pain and discomfort. Analgesia is commonly provided by a multi-modal technique involving varying combinations of paracetamol, Non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), regional analgesia and oral or parenteral opioids. Opioids are associated with an increased incidence of nausea, vomiting and sedation which can complicate post-operative recovery. Different techniques of intraoperative infiltration of local anaesthetic to control postoperative pain are also being used. Their perceived benefits are thought to relate to reduced opioid consumption and therefore reduced opioid side effects. Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) block is a technique which numbs the nerves carrying pain sensation from the abdominal wall and provides effective and safe analgesia with minimal systemic side effects. Their perceived benefits are thought to relate to reduced opioid consumption and therefore reduced opioid side effects. The investigators believe ultrasound guided TAP blocks will reduce pain and morphine consumption with a resultant improved patient satisfaction, a reduction in post-operative nausea and vomiting and earlier hospital discharge. The key research question the investigators are trying to answer is whether TAP block provide better pain relief than local anaesthetic infiltration of the laparoscopic port sites. Both techniques are currently being used in the investigator's hospital.
Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in childhood. Despite access to current diagnostic modalities, diagnosis may be challenging since the child may have difficulty in articulating symptoms. Additionally there is a high frequency of atypical presentation and rapid progression. Delayed diagnosis in children is reported as being up to 60%. Delayed diagnosis >48hr increases the perforation rate from 21% to 71%. Around 20% of children presenting with appendicitis have perforated by the time they come to surgery. Appendix perforation is associated with a prolonged hospital stay and increased cost. Once perforated, major complication rates increase from 1.2% to 6.4%, median bed stay increases from 2 to 6 days and hospitalisation costs are estimated at US $33,348. Conversely, a false positive diagnosis leads to unnecessary surgery in 12%. It has been suggested that only 35% of surgical referrals with possible appendicitis actually need surgery thus impacting on resource use. A reliable test, especially if painless, would be very useful. If positive the child could undergo early appendicectomy in expectation of a reduction in the perforation rate (and, therefore, reduction in hospital stay). If negative the child could be discharged home safely. No adequate biomarker has been identified. Technology already exists to detect changes in Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in gases. VOC analysis is already used commercially to identify disease processes in animals and crops. Although VOC has been previously used to detect human diseases, it has never been used to look for changes in the composition of breath in appendicitis. The investigators hypothesise that the composition of VOC's in children with appendicitis will differ from those without. The investigators anticipate these differences will be of diagnostic and prognostic value in clinical practice. The feasibility of collecting breath samples from children with possible appendicitis to allow VOC testing has not been examined.
Appendicectomy has been the treatment of acute appendicitis for over a hundred years. Appendicectomy, however, includes operative and postoperative risks despite being a routine procedure. Several studies have proved promising results of the safety and efficiency of antibiotics in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. The APPAC study by the investigators, published in 2015 in the Journal of American Medical Association, also proved promising results with 73% of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis treated successfully with antibiotics. None of the patients initially treated with antibiotics that later had appendectomy had major complications. The results of the APPAC trial suggest that CT proven uncomplicated acute appendicitis is not a surgical emergency and antibiotic therapy is a safe first-line treatment option. Reducing unnecessary appendectomies has also been shown to lead to significant economic savings. The aim of this randomized prospective study is to optimize antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis by comparing different antibiotic regimens; intravenous antibiotic (ertapenem) followed by per oral antibiotic (levofloxacin and metronidazole) with only per oral antibiotics (moxifloxacin). Before randomization, the diagnosis of acute uncomplicated appendicitis is confirmed with a CT scan. The hypothesis is that broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics requiring additional hospital resources are not necessary for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis and that per oral mono therapy is non-inferior to the combination of intravenous and per oral antibiotic therapy.
Appendicectomy has been the treatment of acute appendicitis for over a hundred years. Appendicectomy, however, includes operative and postoperative risks despite being a "routine" operation. At the same time other similar intra-abdominal infections, such as diverticulitis, are treated with antibiotics. Several studies have proved promising results of the safety and efficiency of antibiotics in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Our previous APPAC study, published in 2015 in the Journal of American Medical Association, also proved promising results with 73% of patients with CT-diagnosed uncomplicated appendicitis treated successfully with antibiotics within one-year follow-up. None of the patients initially treated with antibiotics that later had appendectomy had major complications. The results of the APPAC trial suggest that CT proven uncomplicated acute appendicitis is not a surgical emergency and antibiotic therapy is a safe first-line treatment option. Reducing unnecessary appendectomies has also been shown to lead to significant economic savings. Already in 1886 Fitz noted that 1/3 of patients in a large series of autopsies from the pre-appendicectomy era had evidence of prior appendices inflammation suggesting spontaneous resolution of acute appendicitis. Acute appendicitis is thought to be similar to acute diverticulitis ("left-sided appendicitis") and this similarity has been shown in epidemiological studies. Recent studies have shown no benefit of antibiotic treatment in the treatment of uncomplicated diverticulitis with outpatient management without antibiotics proving safe and well-functioning. The aim of this randomised double-blinded study is to compare antibiotic therapy with placebo to evaluate the role of antibiotic therapy in the resolution of CT-diagnosed uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The hypothesis is that antibiotic therapy is necessary in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis and that antibiotic therapy is superior to spontaneous resolution (placebo) with the primary endpoint evaluated at ten days after the intervention.
To determine the safety and feasibility of solo laparoscopic appendectomy, which is defined as the application of solo surgery to laparoscopic appendectomy, by comparing consecutive non-solo procedures conducted by a surgeon in the presence or absence of human assistant(s).
Since Semm et.al. reported the first case of laparoscopic appendectomy in 1983, minimally invasive surgery has become the main stay for treating of many surgical diseases. After the booming in the advancement of surgical instrument and breakthrough in surgical skills, the minimally invasive surgery has been widely applied to neurosurgery, spinal surgery, breast, thyroid, hernia surgery, etc. It has been proved that minimally invasive surgery is safe and effective, and further it achieves compatible results and outcomes in oncology and functional diseases. Minimally invasive surgery in alimentary tract, known as laparoscopic surgery, has been performed in gastric surgery (e.g. gastric cancer, tumor, functional disorders and bariatric surgery), hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery (e.g. hepatectomy, cholecystectomy, and pancreatectomy), and colorectal surgery (e.g. colorectal cancer and functional bowel disease). Under a superior heritage of surgical skills from Taiwan university hospital, we introduced laparoscopic surgery in 1996 and currently, laparoscopic surgery becomes the mainstay of surgery in Yunlin branch. In 2015, there were 600 laparoscopic surgery in our hospital, while 150 colorectal laparoscopic surgery in the same year. In recent years, single-incisional laparoscopic surgery has emerged to become one of the focused topic in the world and seemly in our department. Through single-incision surgery, we attempted to minimize the incision wound to achieve better cosmesis and faster recovery. By the valuable clinical experiences gathering in our hospital (Yunlin branch) in recent 10 years, we contemplate two-step plans: first, by retrospective data collection, we can explain the clinical problems based on current statistical results. Second, based on prior (step 1) retrospective findings, a prospective study could be conducted for more evident results.