The Need for Interval Appendectomy after Resolution of an Appendiceal Mass Questioned

2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 216-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. Willemsen ◽  
Lidewij E. Hoorntje ◽  
Eric-Hans Eddes ◽  
Rutger J. Ploeg
Keyword(s):  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

The Management of Appendiceal Mass in Children: Is Interval Appendectomy Necessary?

Surgery Today ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 675-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
İrfan Karaca ◽  
Zekai Altıntoprak ◽  
Aytaç Karkıner ◽  
Günyüz Temir ◽  
Erol Mir
Keyword(s):  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

scholarly journals Routine or Selective Interval Appendectomy for Non-Surgically Treated Appendiceal Mass “Arabic abstracts”

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. A7
Author(s):  
Hamad Al-Qahtani ◽  
Mohammed Khurshid Alam ◽  
Mohammad. H. Al-Akeely ◽  
Saleh M. Al-Salamah
Keyword(s):  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of early exploration versus conservative approach for management of appendiceal mass

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. 3868
Author(s):  
Raj Kumar ◽  
Shivam Madeshiya ◽  
V. K. Pandey ◽  
Ashutosh Shankhdhar
Keyword(s):  
Acute Appendicitis ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Wound Infection ◽  
Clinical Feature ◽  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass ◽  
Early Return ◽  
Group I ◽  
Early Exploration ◽  
Appendicular Mass

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common reason for emergency abdominal surgery. Acute appendicitis is ranging from mild inflammation of mucous membrane to gangrene, perforation and peritonitis. Appendicular mass is one of its early complication developing in 2 to 6 % cases of acute appendicitis within 48 hours of attack. Objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of early surgical exploration and its complications in respect to conservative management followed by interval appendectomy for the management of appendicular mass.Methods: A total 46 cases with clinical feature suggestive of appendicular mass presenting in MLN Medical college, Allahabad were included in study. All cases divided into two equal groups based on mode of management of appendicular mass. Group I (early exploration) and Group II (conservative followed by interval appendectomy).Results: Result will be analysed in terms of hospital stay, morbidity, complications and cost.Conclusions: Early exploration for appendicular mass had advantages of total curative treatment in the index admission, shorter hospital stay, minimal morbidity and ensures early return to work and higher compliance. Operative problems such as localization of appendix, adhesiolysis and bleeding are more pronounced and troublesome with interval appendectomy. Wound infection remains common postoperative complication of early appendectomy in appendicular mass but the rate of wound infection is not so high as to preclude this early operative approach.

Interval Appendectomy after Conservative Treatment of an Appendiceal Mass

2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 352-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hung-Wen Lai ◽  
Che-Chuan Loong ◽  
Jen-Hwey Chiu ◽  
Gar-Yang Chau ◽  
Chew-Wun Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservative Treatment ◽  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

Antibiotic Therapy and Interval Appendectomy for Perforated Appendicitis in Children: A Selective Approach

2007 ◽  
Vol 73 (9) ◽  
pp. 917-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherif Emil ◽  
Son Duong
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Perforated Appendicitis ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Diffuse Peritonitis ◽  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Total Hospital ◽  
Appendiceal Mass ◽  
Selective Approach ◽  
Total Hospital Stay

The role of initial nonoperative treatment in pediatric perforated appendicitis remains controversial. We examined our outcomes after using this approach in a selective manner. Children with perforated appendicitis treated during a 28-month period were retrospectively reviewed. Antibiotics and delayed appendectomy were used if there were more than 3 days of symptoms, absence of bowel obstruction, absence of diffuse peritonitis, and an appendiceal mass. Of 221 patients with perforated appendicitis, 32 (14%) were treated with this approach. Average age was 7.4 ± 4.2 years. Twenty-eight patients (88%) were successfully managed and 26 (81%) underwent appendectomy 8.6 ± 4.2 weeks after first presentation. Two patients did not respond completely, and underwent appendectomy during the same admission. Two patients initially responded, but had recurrent symptoms necessitating earlier appendectomy. There were no complications. Average total hospital stay was 7.2 ± 3.0 days. Initial nonoperative treatment is highly successful in selected children who meet specific criteria. Failure is not associated with increased morbidity.

The experiences of interval appendectomy for inflammatory appendiceal mass

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Takahashi ◽  
Satoshi Obata ◽  
Toshiharu Matsuura ◽  
Yuki Kawano ◽  
Yusuke Yanagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

scholarly journals Routine or Selective Interval Appendectomy for Non-Surgically Treated Appendiceal Mass

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-109
Author(s):  
Hamad Al-Qahtani ◽  
Mohammed Khurshid Alam ◽  
Mohammad. H. Al-Akeely ◽  
Saleh M. Al-Salamah
Keyword(s):  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
Appendiceal Mass

scholarly journals A survey of management of appendiceal mass among surgeons: what is best practice?

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 1850
Author(s):  
Tamer M. Abdelrahman ◽  
Majed A. Mourgi ◽  
Rehab A. Karam ◽  
Faris Sharaf Alfaar ◽  
Ayman Mohammed Alosaimi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservative Management ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Laparoscopic Approach ◽  
Interval Appendectomy ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Risk Of Recurrence ◽  
Appendiceal Mass ◽  
Small Risk ◽  
Underlying Malignancy

Background: An appendix mass is the result of a walled-off perforation of the appendix which localizes, resulting in a mass and it is encountered in up to 7% of patients presenting with acute appendicitis. The management of such problem is controversial. Immediate appendectomy may be technically demanding. Traditionally, management of these patients is conservative followed by interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence. However, the need for interval appendectomy has recently been questioned due to relatively small risk of recurrence. Also, there is still debate on adopting conservative management regarding the recurrence rate, the complication rate of interval appendectomy, and the potential for underlying malignancy. Our aim was to assess the preferred approach and current practice for management of acute appendix mass among surgeons in Al Taif Saudi Arabia.Methods: A questionnaire for the practice of surgeons in dealing with appendicular mass was designed and distributed to 21 consultants and 45 specialists.Results: 14.3% of consultant and 53.3% of specialist practiced the conservative management without routine interval appendectomy. Also, 14.3% and 26.7% of them respectively preferred immediate appendectomy while 71.4% of consultants and 20.0% of specialists did routine interval appendectomy. Most of the surgeons prefer to adopt the open method in immediate appendectomy while laparoscopic approach is the main adopting procedure for interval appendectomy. 57% of consultants stated risk of recurrence as the reason for performing interval appendectomy while, 53.4% of specialists would perform it to out-ruling neoplasm.Conclusions: Surgeons prefer to carry conservative approach with an interval appendectomy in management of appendix mass and laparoscopic approach for interval appendectomy. However immediate appendectomy and conservative management without interval appendectomy was preferred in other studies, which increase the necessity for national guidelines to be considered for management of this clinical condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document