Evidence Hub

Gangrenous appendicitis in children: a prospective evaluation of definition, bacteriology, histopathology, and outcomes

Emil S, Gaied F, Lo A, Laberge JM, Puligandla P, Shaw K, Baird R, Bernard C et al.

The Journal of surgical research, 2012

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The definition and treatment of gangrenous appendicitis are not agreed upon. We performed a prospective study in children to evaluate an objective definition of gangrenous appendicitis, as well as associated bacteriology, histopathology, and outcomes.

METHODS: Five staff pediatric surgeons prospectively enrolled patients in the study at the time of appendectomy if the following five criteria were met: gray or black discoloration of the appendiceal wall; absence of fecalith outside the appendix; absence of visible hole in the appendix; absence of gross purulence or fibrinous exudate remote from the appendix; and absence of intraoperative appendiceal leak. Peritoneal fluid was cultured, and a standard histopathologic review was undertaken. Persistence of fever (>37.5°C) and ileus was documented daily. Patients were continued postoperatively on ampicillin, gentamicin, and metronidazole until they tolerated diet, manifested a 24-h afebrile period, and had a normal leukocyte count. Hospital stay, readmissions, and infectious complications were recorded. The study took place over a 12-mo period.

RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled, representing 17% of all patients with appendicitis treated during the year. Average age was 10.8 ± 3.5 y. Peritoneal cultures were positive in 53% of cases. Gangrene was documented histologically in 61% of specimens. Hospital stay was 3.2 ± 1.1 d. There were no postoperative infectious complications or readmissions related to the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free