Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
CHAPTER
The Appendix
Bryan Richmond
OUTLINE
Anatomy and Embryology
Appendicitis
Treatment of Appendicitis
Appendicitis in Special Populations
Neoplasms of the Appendix
Please access ExpertConsult.com to view the corresponding videos for this chapter.
Appendicitis remains one of the most common diseases faced by
the surgeon in practice. It is the most common urgent or emergent
general surgical operation performed in the United States and is
responsible for as many as 300,000 hospitalizations annually.1
Although appendectomy is often the first major case performed
by the young surgeon in training, few other operations will be
learned that will have such a dramatic impact on the patient being
treated.
It is estimated that as much as 6% to 7% of the general population will develop appendicitis during their lifetime, with the incidence peaking in the second decade of life.2 Despite its high
prevalence in Western countries, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis can be challenging and requires a high index of suspicion on
the part of the examining surgeon to facilitate prompt treatment
of this condition, thereby avoiding the substantial morbidity (and
even mortality) associated with perforation. Appendicitis is much
less common in underdeveloped countries, suggesting that elements of the Western diet, specifically a low-fiber, high-fat intake,
may play a role in the development of the disease process.3
cessful removal of the appendix has not been definitively demonstrated to have any known adverse sequelae.
As a midgut organ, the blood supply of the appendix is derived
from the superior mesenteric artery. The ileocolic artery, one of
the major named branches of the superior mesenteric artery, gives
rise to the appendiceal artery, which courses through the mesoappendix. The mesoappendix also contains lymphatics of the appendix, which drain to the ileocecal nodes, along the blood supply
from the superior mesenteric artery.3,5
The appendix is of variable size (5 to 35cm in length) but
averages 9cm in length in adults. Its base can be reliably identified
by defining the area of convergence of the taeniae at the tip of the
cecum and then elevating the appendiceal base to define the
course and position of the tip of the appendix, which is variable
in location. The appendiceal tip may be found in a variety of
locations, with the most common being retrocecal (but intraperitoneal) in approximately 60% of individuals, pelvic in 30%, and
retroperitoneal in 7% to 10%. Agenesis of the appendix has been
reported, as has duplication and even triplication.3,5 Knowledge
of these anatomic variations is important to the surgeon because
the variable position of the appendiceal tip may account for differences in clinical presentation and in the location of the associated abdominal discomfort. For example, patients with a
retroperitoneal appendix may present with back or flank pain, just
as patients with the appendiceal tip in the midline pelvis may
present with suprapubic pain. Both of these presentations may
result in a delayed diagnosis as the symptoms are distinctly different from the classically described anterior right lower quadrant
abdominal pain associated with appendiceal disease.
APPENDICITIS
History
The first appendectomy was reported in 1735 by a French Surgeon,
Claudius Amyand, who identified and successfully removed the
appendix of an 11-year-old boy that was found within an inguinal
hernia sac and that had been perforated by a pin. Although
autopsy findings consistent with perforated appendicitis appeared
sporadically thereafter in the literature, the first formal description
1296
Downloaded from ClinicalKey.com at SA Consortium - University of Kwazulu-Natal June 09, 2016.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright 2016. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
VIDEOS
Video 50-1: Laparascopic Appendectomy
Video 50-2: Laparascopic Appendectomy in Pregnant Patient
Video 50-3: SILS Appendectomy Across a Spectrum of Disease
Severity
1296.e1
in Perforated Appendicitis
TYPE OF BACTERIA
PATIENTS (%)
Anaerobic
Bacteroides fragilis
Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron
Bilophila wadsworthia
Peptostreptococcus spp.
80
61
55
46
Aerobic
Escherichia coli
Viridans streptococcus
Group D streptococcus
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
77
43
27
18
1297
Differential Diagnosis
Appendicitis must be considered in every patient (who has not
had an appendectomy) who presents with acute abdominal pain.7
Knowledge of disease processes that may have similar presenting
symptoms and signs is essential to avoid an unnecessary or incorrect operation. Consideration of the patients age and gender may
help narrow the list of possible diagnoses. In children, other considerations include but are not limited to mesenteric adenitis
(often seen after a recent viral illness), acute gastroenteritis, intussusception, Meckels diverticulitis, inflammatory bowel disease,
and (in males) testicular torsion. Nephrolithiasis and urinary tract
infection may be manifested with right lower quadrant pain in
either gender.3
In women of childbearing age, the differential diagnosis is
expanded even further. Gynecologic problems may be mistaken
for appendicitis and result in a higher negative appendectomy rate
than in male patients of comparable age. These include ruptured
ovarian cysts, mittelschmerz (midcycle pain occurring with ovulation), endometriosis, ovarian torsion, ectopic pregnancy, and
pelvic inflammatory disease.3,7
Two other patient populations deserve mention. In the elderly,
consideration must be given to acute diverticulitis and malignant
disease as possible causes of lower abdominal pain. In the neutropenic patient, typhlitis (also known as neutropenic enterocolitis)
should also be considered within the differential diagnosis. Appendicitis in these special populations is discussed later in the chapter.
Presentation
History
Patients presenting with acute appendicitis typically complain of
vague abdominal pain that is most commonly periumbilical in
origin and reflects the stimulation of visceral afferent pathways
through the progressive distention of the appendix. Anorexia is
often present, as is nausea with or without associated vomiting.
Either diarrhea or constipation may be present as well. As the condition progresses and the appendiceal tip becomes inflamed, resulting in peritoneal irritation, the pain localizes to its classic location
in the right lower quadrant. This phenomenon remains a reliable
symptom of appendicitis3,7 and should serve to further increase the
clinicians index of suspicion for appendicitis (Fig. 50-1).
Whereas these symptoms represent the classic presentation
of appendicitis, the clinician must be aware that the disease may
be manifested in an atypical fashion. For example, patients with
a retroperitoneal appendix may present in a more subacute
manner, with flank or back pain, whereas patients with an appendiceal tip in the pelvis may have suprapubic pain suggestive of
urinary tract infection.3,7 We have on occasion encountered
patients presenting with symptoms of small bowel obstruction
who were found to be obstructed by multiple interloop abscesses
1298
SECTION X Abdomen
Male
Female
Pregnant
Classic presentation
Equivocal presentation
Localized peritonitis
No
Yes
Laparoscopic appendectomy
CT
() for appendicitis
Lap appendectomy
Brief observation
No improvement
Improving
Diagnostic laparoscopy
Discharge
Other diagnosis
Treat as indicated
Other diagnosis
Lap appendectomy
Brief observation
Treat as indicated
No improvement
Improving
Diagnostic laparoscopy
Discharge
FIGURE 50-1 Suggested algorithm for the approach to the patient with possible appendicitis.
Physical Examination
Patients with appendicitis typically appear ill. They frequently lie
still because of the presence of localized peritonitis, which makes
any movement painful. Tachycardia and mild dehydration are
often present to varying degrees. Fever is frequently present,
Laboratory Studies
Laboratory studies should be interpreted with caution in cases of
suspected appendicitis and should be used to support the clinical
picture rather than definitively to prove or to exclude the diagnosis. A leukocytosis, often with a left shift (a predominance of
neutrophils and sometimes an increase in bands), is present in
90% of cases. A normal white blood cell count is found in 10%
of cases, however, and it should not be used as an isolated test to
exclude the presence of appendicitis.8 Urinalysis is typically
normal as well, although the finding of trace leukocyte esterase or
pyuria is not unusual and is presumably due to the proximity of
the inflamed appendix to the bladder or ureter. If the presentation
is strongly suggestive of appendicitis, a positive urinalysis should
not be used as an isolated test to refute the diagnosis. Pregnancy
testing is mandatory in women of childbearing age. C-reactive
protein has been demonstrated to be neither sensitive nor specific
in diagnosing (or excluding) appendicitis.1,8
No symptom or sign has been demonstrated to be discriminatory and predictive of appendicitis.1,8 The same may be said
of laboratory tests, which are also weakly predictive when considered in isolation. Rather, it is the assessment of the collective
body of information that allows more precise diagnosis.1,8
Imaging Studies
A variety of radiographic studies may be used to diagnose appendicitis. These consist of plain radiographs, computed tomography
(CT) scanning, ultrasound (US), and magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI).
1299
1300
SECTION X Abdomen
FIGURE 50-2 CT scan of the abdomen demonstrating classic findings of acute appendicitis. A, Sagittal view
with arrow demonstrating a thickened, inflamed, and fluid-filled appendix (target sign). B, Coronal view of
same patient. The arrow points to the thickened, elongated appendix with periappendiceal fat stranding and
fluid around the appendiceal tip.
Normal Appendix
Normal Appendix
Appendicitis
Appendicitis
TREATMENT OF APPENDICITIS
Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis
The appropriate treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis
is prompt appendectomy. The patient should undergo fluid resuscitation as indicated, and the intravenous administration of
broad-spectrum antibiotics directed against gram-negative and
anaerobic organisms should be initiated immediately.11 Operation
should proceed without undue delay.
Superior ileocecal
recess
Ileum
Inferior
ileocecal
recess
Ileocecal fold
Cecum
Division of
appendiceal artery
in the mesoappendix
Appendix
D
FIGURE 50-4 A, Left, Location of possible incisions for an open appendectomy. Right, Division of the
mesoappendix. B, Ligation of the base and division of the appendix. C, Placement of purse-string suture
or Z stitch. D, Inversion of the appendiceal stump. (From Ortega JM, Ricardo AE: Surgery of the appendix
and colon. In Moody FG, editor: Atlas of ambulatory surgery, Philadelphia, 1999, WB Saunders.)
1301
1302
SECTION X Abdomen
FIGURE 50-5 Laparoscopic appendectomy. A, Visualization and upward retraction of appendix. B, Division
of mesoappendix using harmonic scalpel. C, Application of endoloops to appendix. Two loops are used to
secure the base; a third loop is applied distally to avoid spillage of the luminal contents. The specimen is
then divided between the endoloops. D, View of completed appendectomy after removal of the specimen.
(Note: Depending on the surgeons preference, an endoscopic stapling device may be used to divide the
mesoappendix and appendix instead of the harmonic scalpel and endoloops.)
Perforated Appendicitis
The operative strategy for perforated appendicitis is similar to that
for uncomplicated appendicitis with a few notable exceptions.
First of all, the patient may require a more aggressive resuscitation
before proceeding to the operating theater. As with uncomplicated
appendicitis, antibiotic therapy should be initiated immediately
on diagnosis.11
Both the open and laparoscopic approaches are acceptable for
the treatment of perforated appendicitis. Although the technique
of appendectomy for perforation is the same as for simple appendicitis, the level of difficulty encountered in removing a friable,
gangrenous, perforated appendix can be a challenge to the most
experienced surgeon and requires gentle meticulous handling of
the friable appendix and inflamed periappendiceal tissues to avoid
tissue injury. Cultures are not mandatory unless the patient has
had exposure to a health care environment or has had recent
exposure to antibiotic therapy because these factors increase the
likelihood of encountering resistant bacteria. However, we routinely obtain them because they sometimes yield resistant bacteria
and are helpful in tailoring the switch to oral therapy on discharge.11 Once the appendix is successfully removed, careful attention should be given to the clearance of infectious material,
including spilled fecal material or fecaliths, from the abdomen.
This task may be accomplished by large-volume irrigation, with
special attention given to the right lower quadrant and pelvis.
Drains are not routinely placed unless a discrete abscess cavity is
present. If an abscess cavity is present, a single closed suction
Jackson-Pratt drain is placed within its base and left for several
days. If an open technique was used, the skin and subcutaneous
tissues are left open for 3 or 4 days to prevent development of
wound infection, at which time the wound may be closed at the
1303
patients who are successfully drained percutaneously. If a periappendiceal phlegmon is present or if the amount of fluid present
is not sufficient to drain, the patient may be treated with antibiotics alone, typically for 4 to 7 days also, as recommended by IDSA
guidelines for treatment of intra-abdominal infection.11
Traditionally, after successful nonoperative treatment of complicated appendicitis, patients were advised to undergo removal
of the appendix, a procedure known as interval appendectomy,
several weeks to months later. This practice has been reexamined.
The rationale for interval appendectomy is based on the potential
for development of recurrent appendicitis and the subsequent
risks associated with emergent removal or reperforation of the
appendix. However, the actual risk of recurrent appendicitis
appears to be small, 8% at 8 years in one study of 6400 pediatric
patients.21 The findings in this study as well as similar results
reported by others have led them to conclude that interval appendectomy should be reserved only for patients who present with
symptoms of recurrent appendicitis.21,22 In addition, the presence
of an appendicolith on CT has also been shown to be predictive
of a higher risk of recurrent appendicitis and has been used as a
justification to proceed with interval appendectomy in that subgroup of patients. This selective approach to interval appendectomy has also been demonstrated to be more cost-effective than
its routine performance in all affected patients.22
A systematic review published by Hall and colleagues23 examining the role of interval appendectomy found that the overall risk
of recurrent appendicitis was 20.5%. All recurrences were seen
within 3 years, and 80% of these occurred within 6 months. In
addition, the morbidity of interval appendectomy was significant,
with complications reported in 23 of the studies, for an overall
rate of 3.4%. Other authors have reported significant associated
morbidity with interval appendectomy as well, with rates as high
as 18%.24
One argument favoring interval appendectomy in adults has
been the observation by some investigators of a higher incidence
of appendiceal neoplasms found in interval appendectomy specimens.8,25-27 Also, perforated tumors of the cecum may be manifested in a similar fashion as perforated appendicitis.28 For this
reason, colonoscopy is recommended in all adult patients as
routine follow-up after nonoperative management of complicated
appendicitis.29 To date, no large-scale randomized controlled trials
examining the outcomes of patients who do or do not undergo
interval appendectomy after successful nonoperative treatment
have been conducted. For this reason, this issue is likely to remain
controversial for some time.
1304
SECTION X Abdomen
Yes
No
CT
Other diagnosis
Appendicitis confirmed
Treat as indicated
Abscess
Phlegmon
CT drainage feasible
Antibiotics
Yes
CT drainage, antibiotics
Adult
Normal
No
Child
Neoplasm
FIGURE 50-6 Suggested algorithm for managing the patient with delayed presentation of appendicitis.
1305
FIGURE 50-7 Sagittal (A) and coronal (B) CT images demonstrate an appendiceal abscess in a patient who
presented with a 2-week history of abdominal pain and was found to have a palpable mass on examination.
The arrows point to a periappendiceal abscess cavity. She was successfully managed with percutaneous
drainage and antibiotic therapy.
Incidental Appendectomy
Incidental appendectomy is the term applied when a grossly
normal appendix is removed at the time of an unrelated procedure, such as a hysterectomy, cholecystectomy, or sigmoid colectomy. Once commonly performed, incidental appendectomy has
become a controversial procedure. The theoretical benefit is that
of eliminating the patients risk for development of appendicitis
in the future, a concept that is thought to be most beneficial in
patients younger than 35 years because of their greater lifetime
risk for development of the disease compared with older patients.16
Data suggesting that incidental appendectomy may be performed
with no additional morbidity have been criticized for not having
been properly risk adjusted. When these data were scrutinized
further, Wen and coworkers actually demonstrated that incidental
appendectomy was associated with an increase in both morbidity
and mortality.36 Other investigators have demonstrated that incidental appendectomy does not appear to be cost-effective as a
preventive measure.37 Finally, the recent finding that the appendix
may actually have a role in the maintenance of healthy colonic
flora makes the practice of incidental appendectomy even more
controversial.4 For these reasons, we advocate careful inspection
1306
SECTION X Abdomen
by traction on the suspensory ligaments of the uterus, a phenomenon known as round ligament pain, is a common occurrence
and further complicates the clinical picture further because 50%
of cases of appendicitis occur in the second trimester. Finally,
biochemical and laboratory indicators used to support the diagnosis of appendicitis in the nonpregnant patient are unreliable in
pregnancy. For example, a mild physiologic leukocytosis of pregnancy is a normal finding. C-reactive protein levels may also be
physiologically elevated in pregnancy. In addition, the surgeon
must be concerned about the possibility of obstetric emergencies
as a cause of abdominal pain, such as preterm labor, placental
abruption, or uterine rupture.38-40 All of these factors have contributed to the high rate of negative appendectomy in pregnant
patients, as high as 25% to 50%, when it is based on clinical
presentation alone.38
The impact of appendicitis on the pregnant patient is severe.
The risk of preterm labor has been shown to be 11% and fetal
loss 6% with complicated appendicitis.41 These data would appear
to favor an aggressive, early approach to appendicitis in the pregnant patient. Complicating this approach, however, was the
finding in the same series that negative appendectomy was also
associated with preterm labor and fetal loss (10% and 4%, respectively). The lowest rates of preterm labor and fetal loss (6%
and 2%, respectively) were seen in cases of uncomplicated
Yes
No
Treat as indicated
Appendicitis confirmed
US ()
Appendectomy
MRI
Observe
Appendectomy
Pt improves
Pt worsens
Discharge
Diagnostic laparoscopy
FIGURE 50-8 Suggested algorithm for managing the pregnant patient with possible appendicitis.
FIGURE 50-9 MRI scan with T1-weighted axial image of the abdomen
in a gravid woman. The arrow highlights the thickened appendix. (From
Parks NA, Schroeppel TJ: Update on imaging for acute appendicitis.
Surg Clin North Am 91:141154, 2011.)
1307
1308
SECTION X Abdomen
TI
R
1
9
0
L
2
0
8
SELECTED REFERENCES
Ingraham AM, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, etal: Comparison of
outcomes after laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute
appendicitis at 222 ACS NSQIP hospitals. Surgery 148:625635,
discussion 635637, 2010.
The authors provide one of the largest series to date, nearly
32,000 patients, comparing outcomes of laparoscopic versus
open appendectomy using the ACS NSQIP database.
McGory ML, Zingmond DS, Tillou A, etal: Negative appendectomy in pregnant women is associated with a substantial risk of
fetal loss. J Am Coll Surg 205:534540, 2007.
Yes
No
Tumor >2 cm
Yes
Adenocarcinoma
No
R hemicolectomy
Is base involved?
R hemicolectomy
No
Tumor <1 cm
Tumor >2 cm
Perforation?
Observation
R hemicolectomy
Yes
R hemicolectomy
Carcinoid
Tumor 1-2 cm
Lymphovascular invasion
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Appendectomy
R hemicolectomy
No
Observation
No
Appendectomy
Appendectomy
Peritoneal lavage
Consider referral for cytoreductive surgery/intraperitoneal chemotherapy
(CRC-HIPEC)
Note: All patients with appendiceal neoplasm should undergo routine colonoscopy
FIGURE 50-11 Suggested algorithm for managing the patient with an appendiceal neoplasm.
1309
1310
SECTION X Abdomen
Parks NA, Schroeppel TJ: Update on imaging for acute appendicitis. Surg Clin North Am 91:141154, 2011.
The authors present a thorough, evidence-based review of
the current available imaging studies used to diagnose
appendiceal disease along with the clinical circumstances in
which they are most useful.
Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Bradley JS, etal: Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and
children: Guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the
Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 50:133
164, 2010.
This consensus statement from the IDSA and SIS provides
evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of complicated
intra-abdominal infections, including appendicitis.
Wray CJ, Kao LS, Millas SG, etal: Acute appendicitis: Controversies in diagnosis and management. Curr Probl Surg 50:5486,
2013.
This timely and well-written review article details some of
the controversial issues relating to surgery of the appendix
and includes an excellent overview of the treatment of
appendiceal neoplasms.
REFERENCES
1. Wray CJ, Kao LS, Millas SG, etal: Acute appendicitis: Controversies in diagnosis and management. Curr Probl Surg
50:5486, 2013.
2. Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, etal: The epidemiology
of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am
J Epidemiol 132:910925, 1990.
3. Prystowsky JB, Pugh CM, Nagle AP: Current problems
in surgery. Appendicitis. Curr Probl Surg 42:688742,
2005.
4. Randal Bollinger R, Barbas AS, Bush EL, etal: Biofilms in
the large bowel suggest an apparent function of the human
vermiform appendix. J Theor Biol 249:826831, 2007.
5. Deshmukh S, Verde F, Johnson PT, etal: Anatomical variants
and pathologies of the vermix. Emerg Radiol 21:543552,
2014.
6. Chen CY, Chen YC, Pu HN, etal: Bacteriology of acute
appendicitis and its implication for the use of prophylactic
antibiotics. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 13:383390, 2012.
1311