Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35971796›Full record

SynthesisBJS open2022

Randomized clinical trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis.

Philip J J Herrod, Alex T Kwok, Dileep N Lobo

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Three Centuries of Appendicectomy.World journal of surgery · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philip J J HerrodGastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre and NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6839-3897
Alex T KwokGastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre and NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5296-909X
Dileep N LoboGastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre and NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1187-5796
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K00414X/1Medical Research Council MR/P021220/1Versus Arthritis 19891
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis aim of this study was to provide an updated meta-analysis comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy in adults (16 years or older) with uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

methodsA search for randomized clinical trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy in adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from inception to 3 October 2021 in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL with no language constraints was performed. Studies were excluded if they included paediatric participants or those with complicated appendicitis. Data on complications of treatment, treatment efficacy (defined in the antibiotic group as not undergoing appendicectomy within 1 year of enrolment, versus surgery without complications or no negative histology in the appendicectomy group), readmissions, and length of stay (LOS) were presented.

resultsEight RCTs involving 3203 participants (1613 antibiotics/1590 appendicectomy; 2041 males/1162 females) were included. There was no significant benefit of antibiotic treatment on complication rates (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95 per cent c.i. 0.41 to 1.04). Antibiotics had a reduced treatment efficacy compared with appendicectomy (RR 0.75, 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 0.89). Antibiotic treatment at 1 year was successful in 1016 of 1613 (62.9 per cent) participants. There was a six-fold increase in hospital readmissions within 1 year of enrolment in participants receiving antibiotic treatment (RR 6.28, 95 per cent c.i. 2.87 to 13.74). There was no difference in index admission LOS (mean difference 0.15 days (95 per cent c.i. -0.05 to 0.35)).

conclusionsEarlier optimism regarding the benefits of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis does not persist at the same level now that further, large trials have been included. If antibiotic treatment is to be offered routinely as first-line therapy, patients should be counselled appropriately.

Indexed as

AppendicitisAcute DiseaseAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsAppendectomyFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID35971796
PMCPMC9379374
OpenAlexW4292180753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.