SynthesisBMC surgery2025
The safety and efficacy of appendectomy, endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy, and antibiotic treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. 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.
- Endoscopic direct-vision therapy vs. antibiotics for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a retrospective cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Operative and non-operative management of acute appendicitis in children: a narrative review.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Review
- Preoperative differentiation of acute appendicitis using NLR, SII, and maximum appendiceal diameter: a retrospective single-center diagnostic study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Endoscopic direct-vision therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAppendicitis, as a prevalent acute abdominal condition in general surgery, has established a comprehensive diagnostic and therapeutic framework. However, significant academic debate persists regarding the optimal treatment strategy. With advancements in minimally invasive techniques, endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) has emerged as an innovative therapeutic approach, providing new options for clinical decision-making. This study employed network meta-analysis to systematically evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and safety profiles of three treatment modalities: conventional appendectomy, the ERAT, and pharmacological conservative therapy.
methodsWe systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through 2024 that evaluated the three treatment strategies for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Databases searched included PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Wanfang. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank the comparative effectiveness of each intervention.
resultsA total of 23 RCTs were included. Regarding complications, the ERAT group (SUCRA, 99.7%) demonstrated significantly lower rates than antibiotics (SUCRA, 37.8%; OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.67), while appendectomy (SUCRA, 12.5%) showed significantly higher rates versus the ERAT (OR, 6.33; 95% CI, 2.35-17.03), with no significant difference between appendectomy and antibiotics. For recurrence, appendectomy (SUCRA, 99.9%) exhibited lower rates than both antibiotics (SUCRA, 2.2%; OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03-0.11) and the ERAT (SUCRA, 53.2%; OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.12-0.64), while the ERAT showed significantly lower recurrence than antibiotics (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.57). Treatment failure analysis revealed appendectomy (SUCRA, 94.6%) had significantly lower rates than antibiotics (SUCRA, 2.2%; OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.02-0.15), with no other significant intergroup differences. Hospital stay showed no statistical differences. Cochrane RoB 2.0 assessment indicated overall sound methodological quality. Network meta-analysis demonstrated good consistency (P > 0.05) with low heterogeneity (τ² low-to-moderate; I² < 50%), and adult subgroup analysis yielded similar trends.
conclusionEach treatment modality demonstrates unique value in specific clinical scenarios. Conventional appendectomy remains the most reliable definitive treatment approach at present. As a minimally invasive alternative, the ERAT shows promising potential in select patient populations, though broader clinical implementation requires further evidentiary support. While antibiotic therapy avoids surgical intervention, it carries significantly higher risks of recurrence and treatment failure. Additional rigorously designed multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to optimize current therapeutic decision-making frameworks.
trial registrationThe network meta-analysis and systematic review were registered in PROSPERO on December 2, 2024. (CRD42024616515).
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.