Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 220 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
28.08.2026
Размер:
86 Мб
Скачать
15.9 Specic Considerations
https://t.me/medicina_free
401
ciated with OHSS, they may grow rapidly to form abdominal abscesses because the ascitic uid of OHSS serves as an excellent culture medium for bacteria with its rich source of nutrients, including albumin [279]. OHSS, complicated by intraperi­toneal inammatory disease, may worsen its potentially life- threatening condition.
For patients with the risk of severe OHSS, such as rapidly increasing estradiol levels or mas­sive follicular recruitment, a decrease in medica­tion dosages or alteration of the ratio of individual medications in the regimen could be attempted. However, these medications should be withdrawn if the non-obstetric acute abdomen is suspected or proven. In the single case of OHSS with perfo­rated AA, there is no mention of complications during the prolonged (37 days) postoperative course or perioperative care except for appendec­tomy and antibiotics [276].
15.9.5 Prognosis
Low birth weight and macrosomia are associated with immediate and long-term risks to offspring, including IVF singletons [280, 281]. The factors leading to infertility may be responsible for the adverse perinatal outcome rather than the process itself [282]. Maternal characteristics—maternal age, the source of the oocyte, and cervical causes of infertility—are strongly associated with the risk of low birth weight and preterm delivery in singleton live births resulting from IVF.Notably, some associations were opposite to those seen for successful live birth. Thus, in women who suc­cessfully have an IVF singleton live birth, the risk of low birth weight is reduced in older compared to younger women. Low birth weight and pre­term birth are reduced when the woman’s embryo has been used [283].
15.9.6 Sickle Cell Disease
15.9.6.1 Incidence
The incidence of AA depends on the prevalence of SCD in different world regions. In Saudi Arabia, the incidence is 16.9% [284]. The inci-
dence of AA is lower in a nonpregnant population with SCD than in the general nonpregnant popu­lation [283, 285]. Also, homozygous SCD is now widespread and has broad clinical variability.
15.9.6.2 Clinical Presentation andLaboratory Findings
Around 75% of the SCD patients reported pain in their RLQ [286], the same percentage as in preg­nant nonsickler patients [29]. Vomiting is com­mon (67%) [286] and is comparable to pregnant nonsickler patients with AA [287]. Only 50% of the AA patients had a fever, while none of the sickler patients had pyrexia in the normal appen­dix group. Around 75% of the AA patients with SCD had WBC >16,000/mm3 [286]. There is a signicant difference in the WBC counts in AA patients compared to those with non-inamed appendices [27]. As with nonsickler patients, delaying the appendectomy beyond 24h in their third trimester is associated with gangrene and appendiceal perforation [20, 286, 288].
15.9.6.3 Prognosis
Pregnancy in SCD patients presents a clinical challenge as maternal mortality is 1–2% and perinatal mortality is 5–6% [289, 290]. Maternal mortality is rare in pregnant nonsickler patients with AA (see Sect. 15.10.3.1), similar to SCD patients [286]. The fetal loss and premature delivery rates were 9 and 18%, respectively, con­sistent with other reports [15, 21]. The variability of complications [291] may be due to the milder form of SCD in the Al-Hassa area (high levels of HbF). The high HbF levels protect against several clinical features associated with SCD, but the association between HbF levels and the severity of the disease process is complex [289].
15.9.7 Appendiceal Endometriosis/
Deciduosis
15.9.7.1 Historical Considerations
During pregnancy, the ectopic decidua (deciduo­sis) is attributed to hormonal effects on the ecto­pic endometrium, namely endometriosis, or normal subceolomic mesothelium. Karl von
402
https://t.me/medicina_free
15 Acute Appendicitis
Rokitansky rst described AE in 1860 [292]. Hirschberg, in 1905, coined the term periappen- dicitis decidualis, describing a patient with AE with right-sided tubal EP [293]. Sampson pro­posed the theory of retrograde menstruation as the etiology for endometriosis [294] and reported AE.Bogatko described the rst AA due to AE in 20weeks of pregnancy in 1949 with the unevent­ful postoperative course and later CS [295].
15.9.7.2 Incidence
Deciduosis is a benign condition not correlated with obstetrical complications during pregnancy. This physiological phenomenon is present in 10% of the CS on the ovary, uterine, and fallo­pian tube serosa and is associated with abdomi­nal pain during pregnancy [296]. Ectopic decidua with glands is subclassied as decidualized endo­metriosis, whereas, without glands, the condition is called deciduosis.
AE is rare in the general population, occurring in 0.2–0.3% of appendectomy specimens [297]. AE accounts for 0.0075–0.045% of extrapelvic endometriosis [298] and 1% of pelvic endome­triosis [299] in the general population. The preva­lence of AE in patients with biopsy-proven endometriosis or chronic RLQ pain is 4.1 and
3.7%, respectively [300, 301]. Pregnancy com­plicated with AE is rare, ranging from 3–8/10,000 deliveries [239]. There are less than 30 cases published during pregnancy. Compared to AA, the occurrence is higher during the third trimester.
15.9.7.3 Risk Factors
No differences were found when age, parity, and pregnancy duration at diagnosis were compared for women experiencing AE and AA during preg­nancy [26, 47, 302]. With pelvic endometriosis, the odds ratio for AE was 20.9 compared to the general population [300].
15.9.7.4 Clinical Presentation
Isolated AE in the general population is usually asymptomatic. The lesions are discovered inci­dentally in appendectomy specimens or colonos­copies with an inverted or bulbous appendiceal orice. Cyclic RLQ pain during menstruation is
typical before pregnancy. In pregnancy, the fre­quency of the presenting symptoms and signs, such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and elevated body temperature, does not differ between acute AE and AA.Therefore, the pre­sentation does not help establish the diagnosis [239, 240, 294, 301, 303320]. In contrast to AA, the incidence of AE is much higher during the third trimester [302].
15.9.7.5 Diagnosis
WBC counts are similar in acute AE and AA and do not help establish the preoperative diagnosis [239, 240, 294, 301, 304321]. Leukocytosis due to deciduosis (or normal pregnancy) is from the production of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [322]. The gold standard to diagnose EA is exploration, done in a standard fashion for AA (see Sects. 15.8.2 and 15.8.3).
Histopathology gives a denitive diagnosis
(Fig.15.25).
15.9.7.6 Prognosis
The overall AE complication rate is higher than with AA, especially during the third trimester, partly because the incidence is the highest during the third trimester. Intra-appendiceal decidual cells induce a higher inammatory response resulting in a higher occurrence of transmural lesions, which increase the risk of perforation [314]. Approximately 27% of cases during preg­nancy were perforated, all cases during the third trimester. There were no maternal or fetal com­plications in 45% of the cases [302].
15.9.8 Appendiceal Carcinoid
Even in the general population, tumors of the appendix are rare. The most common is appendi­ceal carcinoid which accounts for 85% of appen­diceal tumors [324], with a median age of
29.8years [325]. In 80%, the appendiceal carci­noids are incidentally discovered in the removed organ without signs before surgery. Carcinoid tumors are found in the general population in
0.3–0.9% of appendectomy specimens [326]. Several cases of appendiceal carcinoid in preg-
15.9 Specic Considerations
https://t.me/medicina_free
403
a
b
c
Fig. 15.25 (a) Area of deciduosis, accompanied by myx- oid degeneration, in the subserosal layer (area marked by arrowheads) of the tip side (bar: 2.5mm). (b) In a high- power magnication, deciduosis comprises large polygo­nal cells with abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm and
nancy presented as AA [327332]. Berriors etal. published the rst case in 1965 [331]. The inter­action between the carcinoid tumor of the appen­dix and pregnancy has not yet been elucidated [329].
Postappendectomy management during preg­nancy depends on (1) tumor diameter (2cm), (2) tumor localization, (3) tumor grade and stage, and (4) weeks of gestation.
The right hemicolectomy is indicated several weeks after delivery if the tumor is on the appen­diceal base or is >2cm [329]. If CS should be performed due to obstetric indications, a right hemicolectomy should be performed after CS during the same operation.
centrally placed uniform nuclei, characteristic of decidual cells (bar: 2.5μm). (c) Immunohistochemical evaluation shows diffuse positivity for vimentin in the decidual cell cytoplasm (bar: 250μm). (Reproduced with permission from [323] under the CC Attribution License)
Medical treatment like somatostatin analogues and avoiding conditions and substances that cause ushing may be useful during pregnancy. (North
American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society [333])
15.9.9 Perityphlitic/ Postappendectomy Abscess
The appendiceal abscess should be drained with­out delay due to the high risk of rupture, espe­cially in pregnancy. The growing uterus during pregnancy, the contracting uterus during labor, and the shrinking during puerperium form the
404
https://t.me/medicina_free
15 Acute Appendicitis
a
Fig. 15.26 (a) T2-weighted MRI shows hyperintense abscess formation (arrows) posterior to the uterus. (b) After positioning in the left lateral decubitus position, a nonferromagnetic needle (arrows) is placed in the lesion using balanced steady-state free precession sequences. ()
b
unstable inner boundary of the abscess, increas­ing the possibility of rupture [48]. The highest risk of rupture occurs during labor when the uterus contracts, later shrink, and has a signi­cant impact on disseminating pus with the possi­bility of contamination of the genital tract. An abscess can be drained by radiology interven­tional techniques. The patient is in the left lateral decubitus position. MRI-guided puncture through the right psoas muscle is the only safe access to the lesion without other interposing structures. (Fig.15.26). After a successful puncture, pus is aspirated and sent to microbiology. The resolu­tion of an abscess can be re-evaluated with MRI [334].
c
After catheter placement, diluted gadobutrol was instilled in the abscess (arrows) via the drainage catheter (arrow- heads) to evaluate the completeness of drainage. (Reproduced with permission from [334])
lize the minimal intra-abdominal pressure necessary for adequate exposure. Although evi­dence suggests a fascial separation occurs early, it remains to be seen what long-term status these incisions will achieve. No hernia has developed in these patients with a follow-up of
5.5years [335].
15.10 Prognosis
The mortality of appendicitis complicating preg­nancy and the puerperium is the mortality of delay.
(Edmund Adam Babler, 1908)
15.9.10 Puerperium
The unique consideration in the postpartum patient is the presence of a healing abdominal incision after CS.There are no studies on out­comes for recent abdominal incisions subjected to early pneumoperitoneum. Commonly, pneu­moperitoneum is limited to 10 mmHg in CS patients. This prevents undue mechanical strain on the healing wound, though there were no controls for comparison with the standard pres­sures (15–16mmHg). It seems prudent to uti-
15.10.1 Conservative Treatment
Previous studies of conservative treatment found a signicant increase in maternal morbid­ity—septic shock (6.3×), peritonitis (1.6×), venous thromboembolism (2×) [34], and perina­tal adverse events—preterm labor and spontane­ous abortion [195]. This was not conrmed in the largest population-based study [194]. The higher maternal mortality rate was found in nonoperated pregnant patients [336], although a recent study was without maternal mortality [42]. There was no signicant difference in ges-
15.10 Prognosis
https://t.me/medicina_free
405
tational age at delivery, mode of delivery, birth weight, and APGAR scores between conserva­tively and operatively treated groups [42]. The most recent population- based study did not nd a higher fetal loss rate (5%). The authors claim no recurrence of AA before fetal losses. They concluded that the fetal loss might have occurred due to other causes [194]. Gestational age and maternal age are two major risk factors for fetal loss. Therefore, these two factors should be included when comparing treatment outcomes for fetal loss. Potentially, the bias results from lower degrees of appendiceal inammation treated nonoperatively and included patients without AA.
15.10.2 Perforation Rate
Previously, the perforation rate in pregnancy has been reported as high as 55–60% compared to 4–19% in the general population [38, 45, 208,
220, 337]. Up to 1908, the perforation rate was
64% [338]. When the operation is delayed >24h, a perforation rate is 66% compared to 0% with the operation <24h after the presentation [45]. The timing of intervention varies by trimester: 90% in the rst trimester undergo the operation within 24h of the onset of symptoms. In the third trimester, up to 64% have symptoms >48h before operation [109, 339]. Diagnostic and therapeutic delay >48h is more common during labor and the early puerperium [50, 340342]. Perforation increases the risk of generalized peritonitis because the omentum cannot isolate the infection [46]. Diagnostic and therapeutic delay is more common during the early puerperium due to the following:
• Painful and prolonged labor masks symptoms of AA,
• Epidural analgesia during labor suppresses symptoms of AA,
• Abdominal pain affects up to 98% of postpar­tum women [343, 344],
• Leukocytosis and fever are especially exag­gerated in the early puerperium.
The trend in the perforation rate is decreasing from 25–29% [80, 345] to 15–20% during the last several decades [24, 34]. The perforation rate through the trimesters increases: 6–8.7%, 10–12.5%, and 13–26.1%, respectively [24, 47]. In summary, the causes for the treatment delay include [50, 109, 229, 339, 340] the following:
Atypical clinical picture when observa­tion delays the intervention,
Time delay during consultations if departments/institutions are dislocated,
Time delay during the patient transfer if departments/institutions are dislocated,
• Third trimester, painful labor and early puerperium,
Epidural analgesia during labor sup­presses the symptoms of AA,
Lower CT use during pregnancy.
15.10.3 Maternal Outcome
15.10.3.1 Maternal Mortality
Before 1900, maternal mortality was 30%; with perforation operated even without delay, it was up to 58% [56, 346], while up to 100% when dif­fuse peritonitis was present [337, 347]. Up to 1908, maternal mortality was 24%, but 45% with diffuse peritonitis [348]. Since 1950, mortality has decreased partly due to the introduction of antibiotics. In 1947, maternal mortality was low­ered to 0.71% when the disease was conned to the appendix, 30% with peritonitis, and 50% when perforated [349]. In 1954, cases occurring in the last 3months of pregnancy showed a mor­tality of 20.7% [350]. Until 1992, appendiceal perforation had maternal mortality up to 4% compared to <1% in non-perforated AA [345]. Today, overall, maternal mortality is <1% [27
29, 46], or even 0% even with perforated AA [80, 244, 351]. It is rare in the rst trimester and
increases with advancing gestational age due to the prolonged period between admission and operation in the third trimester [46, 109, 252]. For comparison, with MD during pregnancy
406
https://t.me/medicina_free
15 Acute Appendicitis
(patients since 1949 included), maternal mortal­ity was 17% [124]. In all deceased patients, MD perforation was present [124]. The likelihood of maternal death in the USA is higher in the non­Hispanic black population compared to the non­Hispanic white population and Hispanics (OR:
4.42 vs. 4.04 vs. 3.62, respectively) [39]. This could be explained by underlying preexisting conditions such as uncontrolled diabetes, hyper­tension, and cardiac conditions.
Adverse maternal (and fetal outcomes) are
associated with [21, 39, 45, 151] the following:
• A delay in surgery (>24h after onset of symptoms),
• Appendiceal perforation,
• Maternal temperature>38°C,
• Leukocytosis >16,000/mm3,
• Non-Hispanic black population (USA).
15.10.3.2 Maternal Morbidity
Increased maternal morbidity associated with AA was partly due to the increased peritonitis rate [207]. Maternal morbidity with LA is the same [195] or less [233] compared to OA.The advan­tages of laparoscopy include (1) decreased surgi­cal trauma with lesser use of analgesics, especially opioids that can lead to fetal depression, (2) decreased gravid uterine manipulation, (3) mini­mal use of electrosurgery in the proximity of the uterus, (4) earlier recovery of bowel function with shorter time to oral intake and therefore less nutri­tional stress to the fetus, (5) early mobilization with a lesser risk of thromboembolic risk associ­ated with pregnancy, (6) shorter postoperative length of stay in the hospital, and (7) faster return to daily activities [151, 195, 225, 227, 236, 352
354]. Sometimes, a similar hospital length of stay
after OA and LA is because the LA group is hos­pitalized for fetal surveillance, not maternal post­operative surveillance [233]. LA in pregnancy is safe and effective, without any long-term effects on the mother [355].
CS rates are similar in pregnant populations with and without AA, consistent with teaching promoting CS only for obstetric indications [207]. The degree of appendiceal inammation
does not inuence the type of delivery at term, with half of the patients having CS and another half having vaginal delivery in both non­perforated and perforated groups [93]. However, the rate of CS is almost doubled in the presence of peritonitis. This likely reects the increased severity of maternal illness and possible fetal compromise requiring (1) an appendectomy with simultaneous delivery or preterm delivery early after appendectomy [74, 207]. Approximately 12% underwent CS as the mode of delivery and 7% at the time of appendectomy [24].
15.10.4 Fetal Outcome
15.10.4.1 General Considerations
The effects of any medical intervention on fetal mortality must be considered in the context of certain preexisting background risks common to all pregnancies. These include a 3% risk of birth defects, 15% for miscarriage, 4% for prematurity, 4% for growth retardation, and 1% for mental retardation or neurological developmental prob­lems. A variety of non-obstetric surgical inter­ventions resulted in a spontaneous miscarriage (5.8%), premature delivery (8.2%), and major birth defects (2%) [102].
Surgery (appendectomy) and general anes­thesia are not signicant risk factors for spontaneous abortion and do not increase the risk of major birth defects, even during the rst trimester.
15.10.4.2 Historical Perspective
In the nineteenth century, many pregnant patients with AA presented with the conse­quences of advanced intraperitoneal inamma­tion. In that period, miscarriage and preterm labor resulted in fetal mortality of 100% [103,
104, 356]. Fetal mortality was higher in the
years before 1990 when the current possibilities offered by modern neonatology, fast and accu­rate (imaging) diagnostic workup, intensive care, and antibiotic therapy were limited or not available. Abrahams, in 1897, collected 15 cases
15.10 Prognosis
https://t.me/medicina_free
407
from the literature and stated that the fetal mor­tality in cases of perforative AA during preg­nancy, even when operated upon without delay, was up to 90% [56]. Until 1908, fetal mortality was 40%. Edmund Adam Babler concluded that “the mortality of appendicitis complicating pregnancy is the mortality of delay” [348]. This statement was published several years earlier by Heaton [53]. Until 1973, fetal mortality was 20% (perforated AA 30% and non-perforated AA 3%) and seemed to be related to the severity of the disease rather than the period of gestation [244].
15.10.4.3 Fetal Mortality
Without appendiceal perforation, fetal mortality is 0–5% [22, 24, 40, 69, 80, 93, 351], while per­foration raises fetal mortality to 10–36% [24, 27,
28, 69, 80, 93, 351]. For a comparison, fetal mor-
tality of 13.6% (1949–2005) was found when MD in pregnancy was the cause of acute abdo­men [124].
Apart from premature labor, the risk of intra­uterine fetal death increases if the infant remains in utero in the presence of peritonitis. One reason is the rare incidence of infection-induced placen­tal abruption (see Sect. 4.7.2). Another is high pyrexia and bacterial toxemia (see Chap. 4). The adjusted odds for fetal loss increased signi­cantly for the non-Hispanic black population with AA in the USA. They were about three times as likely to experience fetal death as the non-Hispanic black population without the dis­ease [39].
15.10.4.4 Fetal Morbidity
Approximately 17% of women with AA deliver in the same admission, with a 3× increase in pre­term birth [207]. Unexplained antepartum hem­orrhage was 4×, and placental abruption was 2× more likely with AA.The systemic inammation associated with AA and the proximity of the appendix to the uterus may lead to transuterine neutrophil and inammatory cytokine inltration (chorion and amnion) and lead to placental abruption or preterm birth [207]. Premature rup­ture of membranes and postpartum hemorrhage were less common in AA patients, and the CS rate was similar [207]. Notably, there was no
increase in intrauterine death, and infants were less likely to be small for gestational age. Preterm birth in Columbia is 12% [219, 357].
The risk of appendiceal perforation increases with gestational age, and perforation in the third trimester often results in preterm labor [46]. Patients with peritonitis are more likely to deliver preterm and by CS [207]. Appendectomy in the third trimester has a 1.6× greater risk of preterm birth than in the rst or second trimesters and a
3.4× greater likelihood of birth at gestational ages <33weeks [219].
In patients with uncomplicated AA, rates of preterm delivery rate (7.7%) were within the range of the total preterm delivery rate (10.9%), while the rate of preterm delivery with MD was 26% [124]. Compared to the general rate of pre­term birth of 7.7–12.3%, appendectomy during pregnancy did not signicantly increase preterm delivery [37, 358, 359]. Others claim a signi­cantly higher preterm delivery rate (10.9%) in patients with AA in comparison with normal pregnancy (4.4%) [195]. The summary of fetal outcomes is [13, 22, 26, 27, 207, 208, 219]:
• The increase in preterm delivery: – During the rst week after appendec-
tomy (>23weeks gestation), – Age over 35, – BMI greater than 30, – Peritonitis,
• The decrease in mean birth weight at term (<3000g or even 2500g),
• An increase in live-born infants dying within 7days of birth,
• An increase in APGAR <7,
• No increase in stillborn infants,
• No increase in congenitally malformed infants,
• Negative appendectomy with positive uterine pathology/inammation carries a signicantly higher incidence of fetal loss and early delivery.
In the USA (2000–2016), LA was associated with a lower preterm labor risk than OA.On the other hand, no difference in the risks of abortion
408
https://t.me/medicina_free
and CS between LA, OA, and conservative treat­ment was observed [194]. Conservative treatment was associated with a lower risk of preterm labor by 60% compared to OA [194]. Another population- based study showed that infants of patients with AA were less likely to be growth restricted at the time of birth, which is in contrast to previous reports of the increased risk of fetal weights <3000g [22] or even <2500g [13]. The study evaluated only patients who delivered in the context of an AA.There was no opportunity for placental insufciency to develop or for the fetus to be exposed to the inammatory environ­ment and develop possible associated sequelae, such as growth restriction over the remainder of the pregnancy. If the authors had been able to fol­low patients who developed AA and delivered later, the fetal weight at birth would be more helpful in determining the impact of AA on intra­uterine growth. Furthermore, as only 1% of preg­nancies with AA were complicated by growth restriction, this raises the possibility of a coding error and missing data.
15.10.4.5 Negative Appendectomy
The issue raised was the rate of increased fetal loss after the appendectomy of a normal appen­dix. Fetal loss rate within 30days and preterm delivery of 2–4% for both NA and non-perforated AA was reported [208, 223, 247, 360]. These percentages are even lower than in the non­operated pregnant population [361363]. Therefore, it is questionable that NA causes adverse perinatal results [176, 247]. Long-term follow-up after an appendectomy did not increase perinatal and intrauterine deaths in the total (nor­mal) pregnant population [45, 252]. Other studies have limitations because only fetal demise and early delivery occur during the hospitalization for appendectomy.
The same percentage in NAR and simple AA can be explained by other inammatory causes (15%) found with NA [208, 360]. Also, some studies did not exclude patients with a previous history of (multiple) spontaneous abortions as confounding factors.
15 Acute Appendicitis
The underlying (inammatory) pathology, not (the type of) procedure, inuences fetal risk rates. Without other pathology during NA, there is no increase in the fetal loss rate.
If there was an effect of surgical trauma on the fetoplacental-uterine elements, it should have ceased approximately 1week after the appendec­tomy of uncomplicated cases [22, 27]. In one study with NA, those without further surgery were considerably more likely to continue their pregnancy undisturbed than those who proceeded with appendectomy (89% versus 57%, respec­tively) [244]. The week following surgery, this increased risk of delivery was present when per­formed after 23 weeks of gestation [26]. Any complication and increased risk of preterm deliv­ery after that period in a patient without surgical complications should not be related to the opera­tion itself [22, 27]. The premature delivery rate was often omitted in reports on AA, but it ranges from 15–45% [21, 108, 364]. It is now believed that subclinical IAI is a cause of preterm prema­ture rupture of membranes or preterm labor and, as such, contributes to the leading cause of infant morbidity and mortality complications from pre­maturity (see Chap. 4).
There are still conclusion issues [360]. First, some authors included adverse perinatal out­comes after 30days post-surgery. Many patients had a history of previous multiple spontaneous abortions and should be excluded from this analy­sis. Second, without intraoperative pathology, the patients’ abdominal pain could indicate a preg­nancy-related complication that caused the fetal demise. Third, in pregnant patients who under­went an NA, the percentage of LA was greater than in those with inamed or perforated AA, which may account for this observation. Fourth, NA was present most frequently during the rst trimester. Generally, the incidence of miscarriage is highest in the rst trimester (10–15%) than in the 2nd (up to 5%) or third trimester (<1%) [365].
References
https://t.me/medicina_free
409
15.10.4.6 Open Vs. Laparoscopic Approach
Spirtos etal. conducted one of the rst studies on LA inuence on fetal outcome in 1987. All preg­nant patients were in the rst trimester, with no fetal losses [5]. All four systematic reviews [366] reported a signicantly higher fetal loss rate after LA than OA but included a different number of studies. However, all four systematic reviews reported that a survey by McGory et al. [208] predominantly affected the result because of its size. It included more than half of the total par­ticipants in all studies. That study is database­related with many limitations. Fetal loss in all four systematic reviews indicated that only McGory etal. have shown that LA is signicantly worse than OA for fetal loss. The remaining stud­ies have shown no signicant difference between the two operative approaches for this outcome.
LA does have a higher fetal loss rate than OA [366368].
15.10.4.7 Conversion fromLaparoscopic toOpen Approach
Caution should be present because of the small number of patients that have undergone such conversions [369]. Theoretically, if the conver­sion is indicated, then mostly (1) the anatomy is complex, or (2) the inammation is advanced in the form of perforation or an abscess. Both situ­ations result in a longer operative time and a higher incidence of uterine manipulation, poten­tially leading to a higher rate of complications. Current studies show a low (1%) rate of conver­sion to laparotomy that is better than most pub­lished rates of nonpregnant patients [223]. It may reect that the LA in pregnancy is usually performed by experienced surgeons [223, 224]. The conversion rate to the open approach is 14%, associated with 50% of preterm labor and no fetal loss [235, 370].
15.10.4.8 Long-Term Outcome
In most reports, the length of fetal follow-up is not dened or stated as “uneventful” [222]. Even with follow-up, no specic tests for child devel­opment were mentioned [354]. LA in pregnancy is safe and efcacious, without any long-term effects on the fetus or resulting child [371]. Studies with both laparoscopic and OA did not nd developmental delays in children up to 9years old, regardless of the trimester [227, 372]. Children may demonstrate the acquisition of developmental skills at varying rates. However, all children had a normal motor, sensory, and social development by age 3. No long-term fetal effects were noticed on gravid ewes after CO2 pneumoperitoneum [389].
References
1. File:Henry Hancock. Lithograph by T.H. Maguire,
1849. Wellcome V0002559.jpg - Wikimedia Commons [Internet]. https://commons.wikime-
dia.org/wiki/File:Henry_Hancock._Lithograph_ by_T._H._Maguire,_1849._Wellcome_V0002559. jpg. Accessed 19 Nov 2022.
2. Hancock H.Disease of the appendix caeci cured by operation. Lancet. 1848;52:380–2.
3. Peterson R. A case of appendicitis occurring on the seventh day following labor; rupture into the bowel; recovery. Medical News, Philadelphia. 1893;42:515–7.
4. Mundé P.Premature delivery of a dead child, induced by acute appendicitis, with remarks on appendicitis in women. Med Rec. 1894;46:678–9.
5. Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Spirtos TW, Poliakin RI, Hibbard LT.Laparoscopy-A diagnostic aid in cases of suspected appendicitis. Its use in women of repro­ductive age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156:90–4.
6. Paddock C.Pregnancy complicated by appendicitis. Am J Obstet. 1913;68:401–19.
7. Mussey R. Operations of necessity during preg­nancy. Mayo Clin Proc. 1927;2:729–36.
8. Douglas PL. In: Douglas PL, editor. Report on maternal morbidity and mortality in Scotland. London: HMSO; 1935. p.73.
9. Child RG. Surgical problems arising during preg­nancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1944;47:213–28.
10. Sprong WF.Acute appendicitis complicating preg­nancy. Calif Med. 1959;91:258–60.
11. Taylor J. Acute appendicitis in pregnancy and the puerperium. A N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1972;12:202–5.
410
https://t.me/medicina_free
15 Acute Appendicitis
12. Aird I, editor. Companion in surgical studies. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: E. & S.Livingstone; 1958. p.51.
13. Wei JJ, Liang HH, Lin HC. Acute appendicitis and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a nationwide population-based study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1204–11.
14. Agholor L, Okonofua F.Rate of negative appendec­tomy in pregnant women in Benin City. Nigeria J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011;37:1540–8.
15. Eryilmaz M, Bas G, etal. Acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Dig Surg. 2002;19:40–4.
16. Al-Qudah M, Sroujieh A, etal. Appendectomy in pregnancy: the experience of a university hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;19:362–4.
17. Unal SE, Ozel L, etal. Acute abdomen in pregnancy requiring surgical management: a 20-case series. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;159:87–90.
18. Retzke H, Schmidt M.Appendizitis in graviditate. Zentralbl Chir. 1998;123:61–5.
19. Jr Bailey RK, Miller SF, Jones LM.Acute appendi­citis during pregnancy. Am Surg. 1986;52:218–21.
20. Gomez M.Acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Am J Surg. 1979;137:180–3.
21. Horowitz GA, Santiesteban R, Burkett G. Acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Diagnosis and man­agement. Arch Surg. 1985;120:1362–7.
22. Mazze B. Appendectomy during pregnancy: a Swedish registry study of 778 cases. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:835–40.
23. Sivanesaratnam V. The acute abdomen and the obstetrician. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;14:89–102.
24. Ueberrueck A, Meyer L, etal. Ninety-four appen­dectomies for suspected acute appendicitis during pregnancy. World J Surg. 2004;28:508–11.
25. Kazim KM.Appendicitis in pregnancy: experience of thirty-eight patients diagnosed and managed at a tertiary care hospital in Karachi. Int J Surg. 2009;7:365–7.
26. Mourad JP, Erickson L, Lisboa L. Appendicitis in pregnancy: new information that contradicts long-held clinical beliefs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1027–9.
27. Hee L. The diagnosis of appendicitis during preg­nancy and maternal and fetal outcome after appen­dectomy. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1999;65:129–35.
28. Al-Mulhim A.Acute appendicitis in pregnancy. A review of 52 cases. Int Surg. 1996;81:295–7.
29. Andersen TF. Appendicitis in pregnancy: diagno­sis, management and complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1999;78:758–62.
30. Bonfante Ramírez A, Bolaños Ancona R, Juárez Garcia L, Castelazo Morales E.Appendicitis during pregnancy. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 1998;66:126–8.
31. Duqoum W. Appendicitis in pregnancy. East Mediterr Health JJ. 2001;7:642–5.
32. Barros Fde JR, Jdo A RF.Acute appendicitis in preg­nancy. Rev Paul Med. 1991;109:9–13.
33. Zingone AA, Humes DJ, West J. Risk of acute appendicitis in and around pregnancy: a population-
based cohort study from England. Ann Surg. 2015;261:332–7.
34. Abbasi V, Abenhaim HA. Management and out­comes of acute appendicitis in pregnancy— population- based study of over 7000 cases. BJOG. 2014;121:1509–14.
35. Raja NB, Iqbal J.Appendicitis in pregnancy. Rawal Med J. 2003;28:52–5.
36. Butte MF, Fernández F, etal. Appendectomies for suspected acute appendicitis during pregnancy: Experience at a Chilean public hospital. Rev Med Chil. 2006;134:145–51.
37. Maslovitz G, Lessing JB, etal. The signicance of clinical signs and blood indices for the diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2003;56:188–91.
38. Brennan AL. Postpartum abdominal pain. Ann Emerg Med. 1989;18:83–9.
39. Dongarwar D, Taylor J, Ajewole V, Anene N, Omoyele O, Ogba C, et al. Trends in appendici­tis among pregnant women, the risk for cardiac arrest, and maternal–fetal mortality. World J Surg. 2020;44(12):3999–4005.
40. Babaknia H, Woodruff JD. Appendicitis during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1977;50:40–4.
41. Addiss DG, Fowler BS, Tauxe RV. The epidemiol­ogy of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132:910–25.
42. Liu J, Ahmad M, Wu J, Tong XJ, Zeng HZ, Chan FSY, etal. Antibiotic is a safe and feasible option for uncomplicated appendicitis in pregnancy—a retrospective cohort study. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2020;14(2):207–12.
43. Lee SH, Lee JY, Choi YY, Lee JG. Laparoscopic appendectomy versus open appendectomy for sus­pected appendicitis during pregnancy: A system­atic review and updated meta-analysis. BMC Surg. 2019;19(1):41.
44. Cunningham JH. Appendicitis complicating preg­nancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1975;45:415–20.
45. Tamir FS, Klein SR.Acute appendicitis in the preg­nant patient. Am J Surg. 1990;160:571–6.
46. Tracey HS. Appendicitis in pregnancy. Am Surg. 2000;66:555–60.
47. Andersson M.Incidence of appendicitis during preg­nancy. Int J Epidemiol. 2001;30:1281–5.
48. Findley P. Appendicitis complicating pregnancy. JAMA. 1912;59:612–4.
49. Lehner B, Stengg K, et al. Premature labor in a women with perforating appendicitis at 36 weeks of gestation. A case report. J Reprod Med. 2002;47:327–8.
50. Munro PF. Abdominal surgical emergencies in the puerperium. BMJ. 1975;20:691–4.
51. DeLee J. Acute appendicitis in pregnancy with at term. Surg Clin North Am. 1921;1:1003–12.
52. Erbes J. Appendicitis complicating pregnancy.
1939.
53. Heaton G. Some peculiarities of appendici­tis in the female sex, with special reference to