A retrospective study on patients with appendicular mass after successful conservative treatment and to assess the need for interval appendicectomy

Authors

  • Sasikumar M. N. Department of General Surgery, Government Medical College, Kottayam, Kerala, India
  • Sam Christy Mammen Department of General Surgery, Government Medical College, Kottayam, Kerala, India
  • Shankar Das Department of General Surgery, Government Medical College, Kottayam, Kerala, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20180342

Keywords:

Appendicular mass, Interval appendicectomy, Length of hospital stay, Leucocyte count

Abstract

Background: Appendicular mass is one sequelae in unoperated cases of acute appendicitis which are managed conservatively followed by interval appendicectomy (IA). Currently the need for IA has been questioned due to low risk of recurrence.

Methods: Data of all AM patients from 2005 to 2010 were collected and revised the following parameters: age, sex, length of hospital stay, symptoms and signs, total leucocyte count and USG. Those who developed similar pain and those who underwent emergency appendicectomy were considered as recurrence. Patients were grouped as: 1-patients who developed RIF pain,2-asymptomatic patients,3-patients who developed recurrent a/c appendicitis,4-patients who did not developed recurrent a/c appendicitis.

Results: Of the 93 patients, 12 patients underwent IA. Average duration between mass resolution and recurrence is 4.16 months. 14.8% patients had recurrent similar abdominal pain, and only 7.4% patients had recurrent acute appendicitis. Length of hospital stay had a statistically significant correlation with recurrence. The mean TC in the group with recurrent acute appendicitis was 12,500 and asymptomatic group who had a mean TC of 10678.28 which was statistically significant.

Conclusions: Conservative treatment is successful for majority of appendicular masses. A routine IA seems unnecessary. Asymptomatic patients can be followed up without IA. Most of the recurrences occur within the first 3 to 6 months. Length of hospital stay and total leucocyte count influenced the recurrence. IA may be considered in those who are prone for recurrence.

References

Ronan O'Connell P. The Vermiform appendix; Short practice of surgery. 25th Edition. 2008:204-218.

Okafor PI, Orakwe JC, Chianakwana GU. Management of appendiceal masses in a peripheral hospital in Nigeria: review of thirty cases. World J Surg. 2003;27:800-3.

Assalia A, Schein M. Contemporary management of the appendiceal mass. Br J Surg. 1993;80:18-20.

Hogan MJ. Appendiceal abscess drainage.Tech VascInterv Radiol. 2003;6:205-14.

Garba ES, Ahmed A. Management of Appendiceal Mass. Annals African Med. 2008;7(4):200-4.

Gillick J, Velayudham M, Puri P. Conservative management of appendix mass in children. Br J Surg. 2001;88:1539-42.

Khan AW, Sheikh SH, Rahman MA. Results of emergency appendectomy for appendicular mass. Mymen singh Med J. 2007;16:209-13.

Ein SH, Langer JC, Daneman A. Nonoperative management of pediatric ruptured appendix with inflammatory mass or abscess: presence of an appendicolith predicts recurrent appendicitis. J Pediatr Surg. 2005;40:1612-5.

Lugo JZ, Avgerinos DV, Lefkowitz AJ. Can interval appendectomy be justified following conservative treatment of perforated acute appendicitis? J Surg Res.2010;164(1):91-4.

Kaminski A, Liu IL, Applebaum H, Lee SL, Haigh PL Routine interval appendectomy is not justified after initial nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis. Arch Surg. 2005;140:897-901.

Lai HW, Loong CC, Chiu JH. Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. World J Surg. 2006;30:352-7.

Youssef T, Badrawy A. Prospective evaluation of the necessity of interval Appendectomy after resolution of appendiceal mass. EJS. 2010;29(2):85-9.

Hoffmann J, Lindhard A, Jensen HE. Appendix mass: conservative management without interval appendectomy. Am J Surg. 1984;148:379-82.

Downloads

Published

2018-01-25

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles