ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
[S073]-The impact of interval appendectomy timing on follow-up adverse outcomes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global practices and attitudes in acute appendicitis management: the PAMAP-W international survey and Delphi consensus study on the WSES appendicitis grading system.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2026Article
- True Incidence of Appendiceal Neoplasms in Patients Presenting with Complicated Appendicitis: A Call for a Revised Management Algorithm.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Two-stage robotic gastrectomy after bypass surgery for a perforated non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection scar: a case report.International cancer conference journal · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of ultrasound-guided versus operative drainage for pediatric appendicular abscess: Effectiveness, safety and clinical outcomes.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to compare the timing of interval appendectomy (IA) and its impact on post-operative outcomes.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed for adult patients diagnosed with appendicitis between 2006 and 2017. IA was defined as a follow-up appendectomy > 1 week and < 2 years after the initial presentation. Time intervals were divided into 4 groups based on patient quartiles: 1-6 weeks, 7-9 weeks, 10-15 weeks, and > 15 weeks. The primary outcome measure was length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission and IA post-operative complications. Tertiary outcomes included 30-day mortality and colonoscopy suggesting neoplasm or Inflammatory Bowel Disease.
resultsA total of 5069 patients' records whose interval appendectomy fell > 1 week and < 2 years after initial presentation were analyzed. Among them, 1006 (19.85%) underwent an initial percutaneous abscess drainage at diagnosis. The median timing for IA was 9.2 weeks. Patients with IA at 1-6 weeks were more likely to have longer LOS when compared to 7-9 weeks (ratio 1.33, 95% CI 1.2-1.48) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.25-1.52). IA between 7 and 9 weeks (ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.86) was associated with significantly shorter LOS compared to those receiving the operation after 15 weeks. Further, patients requiring abscess drainage (ratio 1.2, 95% CI 1.13-1.34) or those with comorbidities (ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.39-1.63) were more likely to have longer LOS at IA. Socioeconomic and demographic differences including Black, Hispanic, and those with Medicare and Medicaid insurance had a greater LOS after their IA.
conclusionLOS remains lowest among patients undergoing IA between 7-9 weeks and 10-15 weeks after initial appendicitis presentation. Patients with lower socioeconomic status or from racial minorities had a longer LOS after IA.
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.