StayCurrentMD · Management of Post Appendicectomy Intra-Abdominal Collections: A Volumetric Cut Off for Drainage?
Article1 min read·Published Oct 2021Older

Management of Post Appendicectomy Intra-Abdominal Collections: A Volumetric Cut Off for Drainage?

jpedsurg.org shows its articles on its own site.

Read the article on jpedsurg.org ↗

Article · Oct 2021 · 1 min read

In brief

In brief

Retrospective study of 60 pediatric patients with post-appendicectomy intra-abdominal collections found that collection volume significantly predicted failure of medical management. Collections exceeding 2ml/kg body weight were more likely to require procedural intervention, suggesting a volumetric threshold could standardize clinical decision-making for drainage versus conservative treatment.

Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.

ABSTRACT

Background

Intra-abdominal collections (IAC) are a common complication following appendicectomy, one of the most commonly performed emergency abdominal procedures in childhood. The option to drain a collection is frequently available but not always required.

Aim

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of medically and procedurally-managed post appendicectomy IACs and suggest a method of standardising the need for intervention.

Methods

A single centre, retrospective review of children aged ≤16 years presenting between 2014 and 2019 was performed. Patient demographics, management, and outcome data were collected. IAC volume and surface area were calculated assuming a prolate spheroid or true ellipsoid depending on the number of dimensions reported.

Results

60 patients (18%) of patients developed an IAC post appendicectomy. Medical management was undertaken in 44 (73%), drainage in 12 (20%), and surgical washout in 4 (7%). Collection size was associated with failure of medical management: maximum diameter (p=0.028), volume (p=0.002), and surface area (p=0.001). Collections with a volume of 2ml/kg were significantly less likely to fail medical management than larger collections (0/33 vs 6/11; p

Read it at the source ↗

Try
Intelligent Search· scoped to this article · not medical adviceSearch the whole library →