Active clinical trials for "Appendicitis"

There are 2 types of surgical procedures to remove the appendix : open appendectomy or laparoscopic appendectomy. About 60000 appendectomies are performed every year in France. Early diagnosis of acute appendicitis is essential to prevent the risk of disease progression, leading to complicated appendicitis and an increased risk for mortality. Data regarding appendicitis management in the literature are numerous. However, the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the management of those patients has led to a decrease in the number of visits for acute appendicitis (ER), but a higher proportion of complicated appendicitis, probably due to the patient's delayed decision to go to emergency department at the onset of clinical symptoms. Complicated appendicitis may also lead to an overuse of antibiotics, a longer hospital stay, and a higher global cost for the health system. This aim of this study was to evaluate whether this hypothesis was valid for the regional NANCY-METZ area (CHR Metz and CHRU Nancy). The main research hypothesis was that the pandemic caused by SARS-COVID 19 was significantly linked to an increased incidence of perioperative complications in patients who underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis in this region (North-east part of France).

SUMMARY Rationale: A diagnostic laparoscopy is a frequently used method to confirm the diagnosis appendicitis. However until recently evidence-based laparoscopic criteria for determining appendicitis were not defined. If there is any doubt about the presence of appendicitis the appendix is usually removed. In a single centre prospective pilot study on 134 patients the investigators were able to define the Laparoscopic APPendicitis (LAPP) score. In the current study the investigators will validate the LAPP score in order to decrease the negative appendectomy rate by 50%. Eventually the score should lead to a decrease in morbidity. Objective: To decrease the negative appendectomy rate by 50%. Study design: A multicenter prospective validation study Study population: All patients, ≥18 years, operated with a diagnostic laparoscopy for the clinical suspicion appendicitis. Sample size calculation, performed by a statistician/ epidemiologist of the Trial Coordination Centre, showed the need to analyse 778 patients. Intervention (if applicable): Patients operated on appendicitis in 2008 and 2009 (n=843), were retrospectively analysed for negative appendectomies. This cohort will serve as the control group. In this control group no intervention was given, as the LAPP score was not yet defined. In the 778 prospective analysed patients, the LAPP score will be used during a diagnostic laparoscopy. With the LAPP score the investigators intend to halve the number of negative appendectomies. Main study parameters/endpoints: A decrease in the negative appendectomy rate from 9% to 5%. This decrease should not lead to an increase in missed appendicitis (occurring within 30 days), defined as requiring a surgical re-intervention or as an appendicitis or appendicular infiltrate on an ultrasound or CT-scan. Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: The risk of implementation of the LAPP score is minimal. In theory, the use of the LAPP score might lead to an increase risk in missed appendicitis. This might lead to an increase in morbidity.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancer worldwide. Initiation and progression of CRC involve complex interactions among genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors. Given that hereditary and familial CRC only accounts for 2% to 5% of cases, environmental factors are the key triggers of CRC. Emerging evidence has indicated that gut microbes are an important environmental factor promoting CRC development. Gut dysbiosis has been shown to promote colorectal carcinogenesis in mice. Several individual bacterial species, such as the enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis (ETBF), Fusobacterium nucleatum and Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, could exert carcinogenic effects by inducing direct DNA damage, oxidative damage and activating oncogenic signaling pathways. Recent studies have shown that the appendix plays an important role in maintaining homeostasis and biodiversity of gut microbiome by providing an ideal ecological niche for commensal bacteria and production of immunoglobulin A. Considering the key role of microorganisms in gastrointestinal pathophysiology, absence of appendix may result in disruption of microbiome homeostasis, which could potentially influence the risk of developing CRC. In terms of epidemiological evidence, the association of appendectomy with the risk of CRC development has been controversial, and to date no consensus has been attained. Although gut microorganisms could be a crucial pivot between appendectomy and risk of subsequent CRC development, the direct contribution of appendectomy and the underlying mechanisms are still largely unexplored. In this study, we aim to study the association between appendectomy and colorectal cancer, and the role of appendectomy in CRC risk through causing gut microbial dysbiosis.

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of doripenem compared with meropenem in children hospitalized with complicated intra-abdominal infections.

A successful non-operative management strategy for early appendicitis will decrease the number of children requiring surgery and may improve the quality of care related to the treatment of appendicitis. To account for the child-family perspective and treatment preferences, the investigators will perform a study in which patients and their families choose between antibiotics alone (Non-operative group) or appendectomy (Surgery group) at ten U.S. hospitals. This study will determine the effectiveness of non-operative management of early appendicitis with antibiotics alone in children and compare differences in morbidity, disability, quality of life, satisfaction, and cost between families choosing surgery or non-operative management.

The RIPASA score is a Clinical Prediction Rule (CPR) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Since its inception in 2009, the RIPASA score has been validated in various population in healthcare institutions around the world and reported significantly higher sensitivity and specificity when compared to Alvarado score. RIPASA score ranges from 3 to 16.5 with those having a score of less than 7 having a low probability of acute appendicitis and those with a score of 7.5 having a high probability of acute appendicitis. There has been a trend in the past decade on non-operative management of early-uncomplicated acute appendicitis (EuAA) with antibiotic therapy. This antibiotic non-operative management strategy (AMS) has been reported to work in children, thus avoiding unnecessary emergency operation. In adults presenting with early-uncomplicated acute appendicitis, this management pathway is still uncertain and most randomized controlled trials (RCT) and meta-analysis have not been able to show significant benefit of AMS over surgery management strategy (SMS), partly due to variable treatment efficacy, high recurrence rate within a year and a lack of agreement of whom would constitute a group of EuAA. The working hypothesis of this study is that RIPASA score as a Clinical Prediction Rule, can determine a group of patients with a diagnosis of EuAA, based on the range of scores (RIPASA score 7.5 - 11.5), who will benefit from an AMS rather than SMS, leading to improve patients' outcomes through a significant reduction in negative appendicectomy rate, shorter length of hospital stay, reduce post-operative complications and changing physician behavior in managing this group of patients to an AMS rather than SMS and ultimately financial cost savings. The primary specific aim of this study is to compare AMS with SMS in patients with EuAA in a prospective non-inferiority RCT. Secondary specific aims are to determine the range of RIPASA score that can define a group of patients with EuAA, step 3 validation of RIPASA score as a valid CPR and improve patient outcomes in terms of reducing unnecessary negative appendicectomy rate, hospital stay and complications arising from such surgery, and ultimately financial cost savings.

There is no consensus among pediatric surgeons regarding the optimal treatment for children with complicated appendicitis with delayed diagnosis. With the development of broad-spectrum antibiotics, some surgeons have advocated expectant management for these children. However, there is little evidence to determine which children are most likely to benefit from this approach. Prior attempts to determine the effectiveness of expectant management for perforated appendicitis with delayed diagnosis often have not controlled for inherent differences in the clinical status of patients treated non-operatively vs. those treated with immediate appendectomy.

To determine the most cost effective way to treat children with perforated appendicitis we will randomize all children presenting with perforated appendicitis to initial operation, with in 24 hours of admission, or to initial antibiotics, with or without percutaneous drainage, and subsequent interval appendectomy after 8 weeks. Our outcomes will include cost, complications, length of stay, and quality of life measures.

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of two treatment regimens in treating patients with complicated appendicitis. Appendicitis requires antibiotic treatment when the appendix ruptures (complicated appendicitis). This is a study comparing intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy of levofloxacin/metronidazole versus piperacillin/tazobactam for 4 to 14 days. Patients may be switched to oral therapy after 48 hours, at the doctor's discretion.

This study is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized comparison of 2 patient cohorts. One group of patients will receive a transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block. The second group will receive local anesthetic infiltration injected at the surgical site by the surgeon at the end of surgery for a laparoscopic appendectomy. The purpose of this study is to prospectively compare post-operative pain relief in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy who have received either a transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block or local anesthetic infiltration by the surgeon for analgesia to compare the most appropriate delivery of effective analgesia. In an effort to improve postoperative analgesia while limiting opioid-related adverse effects, there continues to be an increased use of multimodal techniques in infants and children.