ライフサイエンスコーパス: appendicitis

1 appendicitis; and a score of 5b, perforated appendicitis).

2 ed immune responses could be associated with appendicitis.

3 need a second hospitalization for recurrent appendicitis.

4 ic but nonsensitive for perforated pediatric appendicitis.

5 gical versus conservative treatment of acute appendicitis.

6 imaging for the imaging work-up of pediatric appendicitis.

7 phy (CT) criteria for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

8 ad a histopathologic diagnosis of perforated appendicitis.

9 stinguish patients with and patients without appendicitis.

10 coliths should prompt the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

11 ning and PCR to identify undiagnosed amoebic appendicitis.

12 as the histopathologic finding of perforated appendicitis.

13 on had histologically proven recurrent acute appendicitis.

14 0 responses were found following complicated appendicitis.

15 pediatric patients with acute, nonperforated appendicitis.

16 ies were performed in 57 patients with acute appendicitis.

17 operated on had pathologically proven acute appendicitis.

18 erative imaging in children with complicated appendicitis.

19 ent an appendectomy for acute, nonperforated appendicitis.

20 underestimation of the incidence of amoebic appendicitis.

21 ica is not a common causative agent of acute appendicitis.

22 y comprised 2756 children operated for acute appendicitis.

23 TNF-alpha levels were higher in complicated appendicitis.

24 ificity of 97.1% (1470 of 1514 patients) for appendicitis.

25 tion-based studies reported the incidence of appendicitis.

26 se outcomes and higher cost in children with appendicitis.

27 urgical and conservative treatment for acute appendicitis.

28 5) who underwent surgery for suspected acute appendicitis.

29 75.4% to 24.2% (P < 0.0001) in patients with appendicitis.

30 ify patients with a low likelihood of having appendicitis.

31 fection (SSI) in children with uncomplicated appendicitis.

32 ere interpreted as being equivocal for acute appendicitis.

33 aphic examination with results equivocal for appendicitis.

34 n be considered in nonperforated complicated appendicitis.

35 able to that with CT for equivocal pediatric appendicitis.

36 s in the management of pediatric complicated appendicitis.

37 iagnostic algorithm, 267 were diagnosed with appendicitis.

38 crobiota in a population of children without appendicitis.

39 A total of 203 (26%) patients had appendicitis.

40 tion of equivocal US examinations to predict appendicitis.

41 dividual clinical variables as predictors of appendicitis.

42 an 18 years old who were evaluated for acute appendicitis.

43 in patients with a high likelihood of acute appendicitis.

44 onged postoperatively because of complicated appendicitis.

45 nt performance of US for depicting pediatric appendicitis.

46 1 patient after 9 months for recurrent acute appendicitis.

47 ective procedures for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

48 0) million children were diagnosed as having appendicitis.

49 he previous diagnosis of acute nonperforated appendicitis.

50 utcome was operative findings of complicated appendicitis.

51 L-8 responses was shown following gangrenous appendicitis.

52 tic accuracy with standard CT for diagnosing appendicitis.

53 nonoperatively re-presented with complicated appendicitis.

54 alternative to surgery for the treatment of appendicitis.

55 al abscess (IAA) in children with perforated appendicitis.

56 small dataset of 438 CT scans annotated for appendicitis.

57 sion, 2 of whom had histologically confirmed appendicitis.

58 dectomies for histologically confirmed acute appendicitis.

59 eventing SSIs in children with uncomplicated appendicitis.

60 with modestly increased rates of complicated appendicitis.

61 therapy-appendectomy (ST) for uncomplicated appendicitis.

62 ctomy is not a risk factor for "complicated" appendicitis.

63 dality in children suspected of having acute appendicitis.

64 provided on the basis of secondary signs of appendicitis.

65 were 2 further patients with recurrent acute appendicitis 1 to 5 years after inclusion.

66 ), fundoplication (10.4%), and uncomplicated appendicitis (10.2%).

67 (18.4%), gastrostomy (13.4%), uncomplicated appendicitis (13.0%), and fundoplication (9.4%).

68 tion: 13.6% vs 17.5%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 14%); appendicitis: 13.4% vs 24.4%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 5%)].

69 ppendicitis (18.0% [$66205117]), complicated appendicitis (14.1% [$51702402]), gastroschisis (9.5% [$

70 bowel obstruction 10.6% vs 14.9%, P < 0.001; appendicitis 15.2% vs 21.8%, P < 0.001).

71 burden from all 30 conditions: uncomplicated appendicitis (18.0% [$66205117]), complicated appendicit

72 ve contributions attributable to complicated appendicitis (18.4%), gastrostomy (13.4%), uncomplicated

73 ve contributions attributable to complicated appendicitis (18.8%), gastrostomy (14.6%), fundoplicatio

74 2.0%; P < .001) and patients with perforated appendicitis (27.6% vs 23.6% vs 23.6%; P = .005).

75 e than 24 hours because of acute complicated appendicitis (29.3%).

76 records were evaluated of which 493,569 were appendicitis, 395,838 were cholecystitis, and 412,163 we

77 ultrasonography (US) performed for suspected appendicitis (53 male and 40 female; age, 1-56 years; me

78 S performance in the detection of perforated appendicitis (5b) was as follows: a sensitivity of 44.0%

79 %; 95% CI, 72.0% to 90.8%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, 7 (10.0%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 19.5%) had compl

80 This study examines elderly patients with appendicitis, a common condition that strikes mostly at

81 Establish a protocol of management of acute appendicitis (AA) in ambulatory surgery (AmbSurg) on the

82 ypically been regarded as the cause of acute appendicitis (AA).

83 intussusception is a rare phenomenon, acute appendicitis accompanying multiple transient intussuscep

84 The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter, open-label, noni

85 11) for all patients with diagnosis of acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, and diverticulitis.

86 In addition, any patient evaluated for appendicitis after implementation of the algorithm was a

87 atment option for image-proven uncomplicated appendicitis, although complication-free treatment succe

88 eatment failure in children with complicated appendicitis, although existing studies comparing intrav

89 Among children with uncomplicated appendicitis, an initial nonoperative management strateg

90 itis by utilizing histopathologically proven appendicitis and 6-week clinical follow-up as diagnostic

91 ssociated with increased risk of complicated appendicitis and adverse events.

92 were measured in 23 patients at the time of appendicitis and after one month.

93 for visibility of the appendix, presence of appendicitis and appendiceal perforation, and establishm

94 confidence intervals (CIs) for diagnosis of appendicitis and appendiceal perforation.

95 and point RI values than do patients without appendicitis and are distinguishable with high specifici

96 Sixty patients with suspected acute appendicitis and body mass index <30 kg/m were enrolled

97 fied as positive, negative, or equivocal for appendicitis and correlated with surgical and pathology

98 plinary CER efforts, while the management of appendicitis and gastrostomy should be considered high-p

99 y invasive surgery for common disorders like appendicitis and hypertrophic pyloric stenosis are all s

100 ostic performance for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and in providing alternative diagnoses.

101 of these underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis and laparoscopy was used in 74.4% of these

102 nfected individuals who presented with acute appendicitis and later underwent appendectomy at our hos

103 o appendectomy (TTA) and risk of complicated appendicitis and postoperative complications.

104 ical delay before appendectomy for suspected appendicitis and the finding of perforated appendicitis

105 ting perforated from nonperforated pediatric appendicitis and to investigate the association between

106 maging findings that were positive for acute appendicitis, and 336 had negative findings.

107 95% CI, 4.1% to 19.5%) had complicated acute appendicitis, and 5 (7.1%; 95% CI, 2.4% to 15.9%) did no

108 city of MR imaging in the detection of acute appendicitis, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals

109 ected to be cholecystitis, eight patients as appendicitis, and four patients as diverticulitis.

110 roup had histopathologically confirmed acute appendicitis, and there were no significant complication

111 pace infections in children with complicated appendicitis, and those presenting with high-severity di

112 f 4, equivocal; a score of 5a, nonperforated appendicitis; and a score of 5b, perforated appendicitis

113 Among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the pres

114 For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics were noninferior to appendecto

115 0.95; 95% CI: -0.25, 2.17) and nonperforated appendicitis (APC=0.44; 95% CI: -0.84, 1.73).

116 f US and unenhanced MR imaging for pediatric appendicitis appears to be effective.

117 owing discharge in children with complicated appendicitis are limited.

118 Management of appendicitis as an urgent rather than emergency procedur

119 y course) with appendectomy in patients with appendicitis at 25 U.S. centers.

120 and June 2012 for cases of appendectomy for appendicitis at 6 institutions (preoperative characteris

121 8-month period, 122 children with perforated appendicitis at a tertiary referral children's hospital

122 going acute appendectomy for suspected acute appendicitis at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockhol

123 developed for all children with complicated appendicitis at Monroe Carell Jr Children's Hospital at

124 developed for all children with complicated appendicitis at Monroe Carell Jr Children's Hospital at

125 Among patients with negative findings for appendicitis at MRI, an alternate diagnosis was provided

126 US studies performed for suspected pediatric appendicitis at one institution from July 1, 2013, to Ju

127 o underwent appendectomy for suspected acute appendicitis at our tertiary hospital during 2015 versus

128 A total of 577 patients with a diagnosis of appendicitis at US met the study criteria (468 with a sc

129 Patients treated for appendicitis before and after pathway implementation wer

130 or neurological degeneration, who developed appendicitis between ages 68 through 77 years and underw

131 years or older operated on for assumed acute appendicitis between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2

132 and underwent appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2

133 ent (NOM) with antibiotics for uncomplicated appendicitis, both in adults and children.

134 5 (7.1%; 95% CI, 2.4% to 15.9%) did not have appendicitis but received appendectomy for suspected rec

135 ized as normal, uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis by 2 radiologists in blinded manner.

136 f surgical care for children with perforated appendicitis by improving outcomes and lowering costs.

137 d between patients with and patients without appendicitis by utilizing histopathologically proven app

138 mple appendicitis (SA, acute) or complicated appendicitis (CA, gangrenous/ruptured)).

139 Atypically located acute appendicitis can show atypical presentation and result i

140 However, amoebic appendicitis can sometimes be severe and life threatenin

141 Two of the acute appendicitis cases had normal, the other two had elevate

142 infection was confirmed in 9 (15.8%) of the appendicitis cases.

143 cious clinical and imaging findings of acute appendicitis coexisting with multiple spontaneously reso

144 truction, intra-abdominal abscess, recurrent appendicitis, complicated appendicitis, return to baseli

145 aged 18 to 60 years with uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by a CT scan.

146 of omental samples from patients with acute appendicitis confirmed neutrophil recruitment and bacter

147 tokine responses in patients following acute appendicitis did not differ from healthy controls.

148 uded comparisons of the rates of complicated appendicitis, disability days, and health care costs bet

149 es can mimic more urgent pathologies such as appendicitis, diverticulitis, or malignancies.

150 The primary outcome was complicated appendicitis documented at operation.

151 is also evidence that NOM for uncomplicated appendicitis does not statistically increase the perfora

152 ithout the need for surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during a 1-year follow-up period.

153 only 1 patient (5%) had recurrence of acute appendicitis during follow-up.

154 ent strategy for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, evidence is limited by conflicting results

155 with visualized appendices at US, those with appendicitis exhibit significantly higher point PSV and

156 proportion of pediatric patients with acute appendicitis experience prolonged in-hospital delays bef

157 lysis, seasonal variation was found in acute appendicitis (F = 119.62, P < 0.0001), acute cholecystit

158 The odds ratios of complicated appendicitis for late vs early TTA across hospitals rang

159 ents who had undergone imaging for suspected appendicitis from January 1, 2011, through December 31,

160 ears undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis from January 2013 to June 2015 across 17 ho

161 ive observational study enrolled adults with appendicitis from January 2017 to June 2018.

162 ted with antibiotics for acute nonperforated appendicitis had undergone an appendectomy, although acu

163 operative imaging in children with suspected appendicitis has been previously described.

164 s the primary imaging modality for suspected appendicitis has not been previously studied.

165 CT as the gold standard in diagnosing acute appendicitis has raised concerns regarding radiation exp

166 The treatment of acute appendicitis has seen changes in diagnosis and therapy i

167 and, including colon cancer, diverticulitis, appendicitis, hernias, varicose veins, diabetes, atheros

168 o scores correctly predicted the presence of appendicitis in 61.1% (22 of 36) and 77.3% (34 of 44) of

169 findings in a larger cohort of children with appendicitis in addition to profiling the appendiceal mi

170 graphy (CT) utilization for the diagnosis of appendicitis in an academic children's hospital emergenc

171 f atypical locations of the appendix because appendicitis in an unusual area may mimic other acute ab

172 However, the diagnosis of appendicitis in children can be difficult and many cente

173 PVI irrigation for perforated appendicitis in children demonstrated a strong probabili

174 onoperative treatment of acute nonperforated appendicitis in children during 5 years of follow-up.

175 uggests that nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis in children is feasible and safe and that f

176 Implementation of a diagnostic algorithm for appendicitis in children significantly decreases CT util

177 uture studies evaluating treatment of simple appendicitis in children, to reduce heterogeneity betwee

178 ng surrounding the definition of complicated appendicitis in children.

179 ith "usual care" for treatment of perforated appendicitis in children.

180 d appendicitis and the finding of perforated appendicitis in children.

181 nt with antibiotics versus surgery for acute appendicitis in children.

182 commonly used in the evaluation of suspected appendicitis in children.

183 -relevant framework for defining complicated appendicitis in children.

184 and specific for the diagnosis of equivocal appendicitis in nonsedated pediatric patients.

185 between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis in patients with a high likelihood of acute

186 ssion rates following appendectomy for acute appendicitis in pediatric patients.

187 tive and 97.1% specific for the diagnosis of appendicitis in pediatric patients.

188 Estimates of the incidence of acute appendicitis in pregnancy remain imprecise and inconsist

189 iew was conducted of patients diagnosed with appendicitis in the ED at Children's Mercy Hospital from

190 cute (A), perforated (P), and gangrenous (G) appendicitis in the United States.

191 All inpatients with a diagnosis of appendicitis in these studies (1988/1989, 1996/1997, 200

192 pared between the United States and England: appendicitis, incarcerated/strangulated abdominal hernia

193 3 cases were clinically diagnosed as amoebic appendicitis, including 2 diagnosed at the time of appen

194 The rate of complicated appendicitis increased (23% in 2015).

195 Nevertheless, the rate of complicated appendicitis increased.

196 rategy for children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis, incurring less morbidity and lower costs t

197 Complicated appendicitis is a common condition in children that caus

198 Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency worldwide.

199 Appendicitis is a global disease.

200 edical (antibiotics only) treatment of acute appendicitis is an acceptable alternative to surgical ap

201 Acute appendicitis is an emergent surgically treated disease g

202 Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergen

203 lized countries is sparse, but suggests that appendicitis is rising rapidly.

204 hat nonoperative management of uncomplicated appendicitis is safe, but overall effectiveness is deter

205 The incidence of appendicitis is stable in most Western countries.

206 Appendicitis is the most common abdominal diagnosis lead

207 ons, while the common surgical conditions of appendicitis, laparotomy, and hernia had no mentions at

208 han low-burden hospitals to treat perforated appendicitis (log %, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.03-0.12; P = .04) a

209 In these positions, appendicitis may mimic acute diverticulitis, cholecystit

210 Since patients with acute appendicitis may not always show the typical signs and s

211 Among the 93 patients, 36 (38.7%) had proven appendicitis (mean PSV, 19.7 cm/sec; mean RI, 0.69) and

212 se course suggests that some cases of simple appendicitis might be self-limiting or respond to antibi

213 dality in children suspected of having acute appendicitis, MRI examinations had high diagnostic perfo

214 still a challenge, since the possibility of appendicitis must be entertained in any patient presenti

215 cidental appendectomy for reasons other than appendicitis (n = 18), or ileocecectomy for inflammatory

216 in other neurological conditions, abortion, appendicitis, obstructed labour, and maternal sepsis.

217 was not associated with risk of complicated appendicitis (odds ratio per 1-hour increase in TTA, 0.9

218 he USA than in England for all 5 conditions: appendicitis [odds ratio (OR) 4.63, 95% confidence inter

219 RI greater than 0.65 yielded specificity for appendicitis of 88.9% each, with sensitivity of 100.0% a

220 RI greater than 0.65 yielded specificity for appendicitis of 94.7% and 96.5% with sensitivity of 88.9

221 od; none of these 6 patients had evidence of appendicitis on histopathological examination.

222 deep learning model, AppendiXNet, to detect appendicitis, one of the most common life-threatening ab

223 loping histologically proven recurrent acute appendicitis or a clinical diagnosis of recurrent append

224 ssociated with increased risk of complicated appendicitis or adverse outcomes.

225 ing the 21st century the pooled incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy (in per 100,000 person-year

226 We compared the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy across the world and evalua

227 In the 21st century, the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy is high in newly industrial

228 ion-based studies reporting the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy.

229 th 120 studies reporting on the incidence of appendicitis or appendectomy.

230 inferior to standard CT in diagnosing acute appendicitis or distinguishing between uncomplicated and

231 ical records were reviewed to document acute appendicitis or other causes of abdominal pain.

232 ngland than in the USA for all 5 conditions: appendicitis (OR 3.22, 95% CI 2.73-3.78), abdominal hern

233 Clinical data were captured as Pediatric Appendicitis (PAS) or Alvarado scores and considered as

234 nflammation in a prospective cohort of acute appendicitis patients.

235 bdominal aortic aneurysm, aortic dissection, appendicitis, perforated esophagus, peptic ulcer, small

236 bdominal aortic aneurysm, aortic dissection, appendicitis, perforated esophagus, peptic ulcer, small

237 to operating room, percentage of complicated appendicitis, postoperative length of hospital stay, and

238 aged 7 to 17 years with acute uncomplicated appendicitis presenting at a single pediatric tertiary a

239 ents (23.6%) were diagnosed with complicated appendicitis (range, 5.2%-51.1% across hospitals).

240 es, the majority of patients presenting with appendicitis receive CT imaging, undergo laparoscopic ap

241 ll of his/her normal activities secondary to appendicitis-related care (expected difference, 5 days),

242 -25] days, respectively; P < .001) and lower appendicitis-related health care costs (median [IQR], $4

243 after an appendectomy for acute complicated appendicitis remains unclear.

244 abscess, recurrent appendicitis, complicated appendicitis, return to baseline health, readmission, re

245 07; I = 1%) and the incidence of complicated appendicitis (RR 2.52; 95% CI 1.17-5.43; P = 0.02; I = 0

246 use of postoperative antibiotics for simple appendicitis (SA) in children.

247 iage, and admission; and diagnosis as simple appendicitis (SA, acute) or complicated appendicitis (CA

248 Accuracy to categorize appendicitis severity was 79% for both protocols.

249 in 30 days in the ubrogepant groups included appendicitis, spontaneous abortion, pericardial effusion

250 CI: -2.22, -0.86), whereas the incidence of appendicitis stabilized (APC=-0.36; 95% CI: -0.97, 0.26)

251 iews evaluating treatments for children with appendicitis, suggesting the need for a COS.

252 n are less likely to be diagnosed with acute appendicitis than nonpregnant women, with the lowest ris

253 ed appendix cases, including four with acute appendicitis that presented to our emergency department

254 Therefore, in the case of appendicitis the symptoms may lead to the wrong diagnosi

255 Among children with suspected appendicitis, the use of US imaging has increased substa

256 n aged 7 through 17 years with uncomplicated appendicitis treated at 10 tertiary children's hospitals

257 n with histologically proven recurrent acute appendicitis under active observation was 12% (95% CI 5-

258 In pediatric patients with acute appendicitis undergoing appendectomy, SDD is not associa

259 He was initially treated as acute appendicitis, undergoing an appendectomy but following a

260 All patients with CT confirmed appendicitis underwent appendectomy to obtain histopatho

261 which the same patient with suspected acute appendicitis underwent both standard and low-dose CT all

262 n who underwent appendectomy for complicated appendicitis using data from the NSQIP-Pediatric Appende

263 appendicitis versus control patients without appendicitis using Medicare data from 2002 to 2017, exam

264 ion of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis of appendicitis, using the National Hospital Ambulatory Med

265 ment of patients undergoing appendectomy for appendicitis versus control patients without appendiciti

266 ng characteristic curve for the diagnosis of appendicitis was 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9

267 The incidence of complicated appendicitis was 2.7% in the nonoperative group (1 of 37

268 Results The frequency of appendicitis was 20.5% (407 of 1982 patients).

269 he time outside pregnancy, the rate of acute appendicitis was 35% lower during the antepartum period

270 after discharge in children with complicated appendicitis was associated with higher rates of both tr

271 Appendicitis was correctly identified in 573 (99.3%) of

272 tion between treatment delay and complicated appendicitis was examined across all hospitals by using

273 ed in pediatric patients suspected of having appendicitis was implemented at the authors' institution

274 64) for all ages; no increased risk of acute appendicitis was observed in the postpartum period compa

275 ad undergone an appendectomy, although acute appendicitis was only histologically confirmed in 4/24 (

276 The rate of complicated appendicitis was significantly higher in the late group

277 Historically, acute appendicitis was treated with emergency appendectomy.

278 cluding 50 children with acute nonperforated appendicitis, was performed.

279 imaging modality for the evaluation of acute appendicitis were 97.9% (95 of 97; 95% CI: 92.8%, 99.8%)

280 Absolute rates of acute appendicitis were calculated during the antepartum and p

281 17,732 treatments of patients diagnosed with appendicitis were collected.

282 lly significant associations with perforated appendicitis were longer duration of symptoms (odds rati

283 Consecutive patients with acute perforated appendicitis were randomized (1:1) to PVI or NI from Apr

284 , gastrointestinal bleed, bowel obstruction, appendicitis) where the best treatment option was uncert

285 pendicolith were predictive of "complicated" appendicitis, whereas co-morbidities, smoking, and ED tr

286 hat likely contribute to the pathogenesis of appendicitis, which may one day be leveraged to improve

287 oportionate number of patients with advanced appendicitis while falling behind in the use of laparosc

288 tal readmission in children with complicated appendicitis who received oral versus intravenous antibi

289 All patients with complicated appendicitis who were treated with early appendectomy du

290 s with imaging-confirmed acute nonperforated appendicitis who would normally have had emergency appen

291 ears undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, who received postdischarge antibiotics at

292 Eligible children had acute appendicitis with an appendix mass and were successfully

293 onoperative treatment of acute nonperforated appendicitis with antibiotics in children.

294 the CT findings of atypically located acute appendicitis with cases and remind the clinicians and ra

295 e potential to treat uncomplicated pediatric appendicitis with fewer disability days than surgery.

296 Routine biomarkers could predict severity of appendicitis with high specificities, but low sensitivit

297 Rates of complicated appendicitis with peritonitis identified at the time of

298 tive predictive value of 93.3% for depicting appendicitis, with 89 of 782 (11.4%) equivocal examinati

299 score of 5 or lower could be used to exclude appendicitis, with a 80.8% (21 of 26) and 90% (18 of 20)

300 this manner to compare rates of complicated appendicitis within a time frame sensitive to each hospi