IMPORTANCEAppendectomy remains the standard of care for uncomplicated acute appendicitis despite several randomized clinical trials pointing to the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management of this disease. A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials may contribute to the body of evidence and help surgeons select which patients may benefit from surgical and nonsurgical treatment.OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of nonoperative management vs appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis.DATA SOURCES A systematic review was conducted using indexed sources (Embase and PubMed) to search for published randomized clinical trials in English comparing nonoperative management with appendectomy in adult patients presenting with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. To increase sensitivity, no limits were set for outcomes reported, sex, or year of publication. All nonrandomized or quasi-randomized trials were excluded, and validated primers were used.STUDY SELECTION Among 1504 studies imported for screening, 805 were duplicates, and 595 were excluded for irrelevancy. A further 96 were excluded after full-text review, mainly owing to wrong study design or inclusion of pediatric populations. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for the meta-analysis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISMeta-extraction was conducted with independent extraction by multiple reviewers using the Covidence platform for systematic reviews and in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Data were pooled by a random-effects model. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESTreatment success and major adverse effects at 30 days' follow-up. RESULTSThe main outcome (treatment success proportion at 30 days of follow-up) was not significantly different in the operative and nonoperative management cohorts (risk ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66-1.11). Likewise, the percentage of major adverse effects was similar in both cohorts (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.29-1.79). However, in the nonoperative management group, length of stay was significantly longer (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.26-1.70), and a median cumulative incidence of 18% of recurrent appendicitis was observed.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These results point to the general safety and efficacy of nonoperative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. However, this strategy may be associated with an increase in duration of hospital stay and a higher rate of recurrent appendicitis. This meta-analysis may help inform decision-making in nonoperative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis.
Background: Despite the relatively high incidence of phalangeal fractures, there is an imperfect understanding of the epidemiology and anatomical distribution of these fractures. This study describes the patient characteristics, anatomic distribution, and detailed fracture patterns of phalangeal fractures among a large adult cohort in the United States. Methods: A retrospective study was performed among patients with phalangeal fractures in the United States between January 2010 and January 2015. Included patients were 18 years old or older and had a diagnosis of a phalangeal fracture. A total of 2140 phalangeal fractures in 1747 patients were included, and a manual chart review was performed to collect epidemiological and radiographic information. Fractures were classified based on location and fracture pattern. Results: The median age at the time of injury was 45 years (interquartile range, 30–57), and 65% of patients were men. The small finger had the highest incidence of fractures (26%) followed by the ring finger (24%). Distal and proximal phalanges demonstrated the highest incidence of fractures at 39% each. The dominant hand was affected in 44% of cases. Eighteen percent of fractures were due to a work-related trauma mechanism, and the most common mechanism of injury was blunt trauma (46%). Conclusion: This study provides a detailed overview of the anatomic distribution and fracture patterns of phalangeal fractures in an adult US population and, thus, may aid hand surgeons treating these injuries.
Background: Demographic information related to phalangeal fractures that undergo simultaneous vascular repair, as well as their complication and reoperation profiles, remain incompletely understood. This study aimed to examine the patient and fracture characteristics influencing the outcomes after these injuries in a large Unites States adult patient cohort and to identify risk factors associated with unplanned reoperation of these fractures. Methods: A retrospective study was performed, identifying 54 phalangeal fractures in 48 patients; all fractures were also associated with vascular injuries requiring repair. Patients with digital amputations were excluded. A manual chart review was performed to collect epidemiologic, radiographic, and surgical outcome information. Results: The incidence of phalangeal fractures undergoing vascular repair was higher in the non-dominant hand, middle finger, proximal phalanx, and phalangeal shaft. Most (52.9%) fractures were due to occupational injury, with the most common mechanism being sharp injuries. More than half of the fractures had a nerve injury, and 13% required a vein graft for vascular repair. More than half of the fractures required at least one reoperation, most commonly due to “stiffness/tendon adhesion” (50%) and “nonunion or delayed union” (21.4%). In multivariable analysis, thumb (odds ratio [OR]: 35.1, P = .043) and index (OR: 14.0, P = .048) fingers’ fractures were found to be independently associated with unplanned reoperation. Conclusions: Phalangeal fractures requiring vascular repair occurred most often in the occupational setting and more than 50% required at least one unplanned reoperation. Injuries sustained in the thumb and index finger were more likely to undergo unplanned reoperation, which may guide initial treatment decision-making and postoperative follow-up.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.