ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2018
Establishing the need for clinical follow-up after emergency appendicectomy in the modern era: Retrospective case series of 145 patients.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEmergency appendicectomy (EA) is a commonly performed operation, with an increasing number of EAs being performed as day-case. The aim of this study is to establish if there is a need for post-operative follow-up and if this could prevent adverse outcomes.
methodsA retrospective analysis of patients who underwent EA at multiple centres over a six-month period was undertaken. They were contacted by telephone and a standardised questionnaire was used to ascertain post-operative outcomes, including duration of analgesia use, duration before return to normal daily activity (ADLs), surgical site infection rates (SSI) and rates of re-presentation to medical services. Patients were stratified into those who underwent laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy, smokers versus non-smokers, and body mass index (BMI).
resultsA total of 145 patients were included in the study. Patients undergoing open surgery (vs. laparoscopic surgery) required analgesia for significantly longer periods, with a significantly longer return to ADLs. Smokers, when compared to non-smokers experienced a significantly longer return to work/school; and significantly higher risk of SSI and re-presenting to accident & emergency; as did patients with a BMI >30 when compared to those with a BMI <30.
conclusionMost patients do not need formal outpatient assessment after EA. However, there is clearly a subset of higher risk patients who may benefit from this - patients who are smokers or obese. They have prolonged recovery times, and are at greater risk of SSI. Earlier surgical outpatient follow-up of these patients could prevent adverse outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.