0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Increased Risk of Mucinous Neoplasm of the Appendix in Adults Undergoing Interval Appendectomy FREE

Matthew J. Furman, MD2; Mitchell Cahan, MD2; Philip Cohen, MD2; Laura A. Lambert, MD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Division of Surgical Oncology, UMass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, Massachusetts
2Department of Surgery, UMass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, Massachusetts
JAMA Surg. 2013;148(8):703-706. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.1212.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  The role of interval appendectomy after conservative management of perforated appendicitis remains controversial. Determining the etiology of perforated appendicitis is one reason to perform interval appendectomies.

Objective  To determine whether adult patients undergoing interval appendectomy experience an increased rate of neoplasms.

Design  Retrospective study.

Setting  A single tertiary care institution.

Participants  All patients 18 years or older who underwent appendectomy for presumed appendicitis from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010.

Exposures  Appendectomy for presumed appendicitis.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Underlying neoplasm as the cause of presentation for presumed appendicitis. Demographic data, clinicopathologic characteristics, interval resection rate, and complication data were collected and analyzed.

Results  During the study period, 376 patients underwent appendectomies. Interval appendectomy was performed in 17 patients (4.5%). Neoplasms were identified in 14 patients (3.7%); 5 of those tumors occurred in patients who had undergone interval appendectomy (29.4%). Nine neoplasms were mucinous tumors (64.3%), including all neoplasms associated with interval appendectomies. The mean age of all patients with appendiceal tumors was 49 years (range, 35-74 years).

Conclusions and Relevance  Mucinous neoplasms of the appendix were found in 5 of 17 patients (29.4%) undergoing interval appendectomy. Interval appendectomies should be considered in all adult patients, especially those 40 years or older, to determine the underlying cause of appendicitis. A multi-institutional study to determine the generalizability of these findings is warranted.

Figures in this Article

Appendicitis is one of the most common problems seen by general surgeons, with an incidence of more than 500 000 cases per year in the United States alone.13 For patients with simple appendicitis (nonperforated, no phlegmon), the usual treatment is an immediate appendectomy. For patients with complicated appendicitis (abscess, perforation, phlegmon), many surgeons delay appendectomy and initially treat the patient with antimicrobial therapy and drainage as indicated. The rationale for this approach is to avoid the potential increased morbidity of surgery in the acute setting, as well as the possibility of a more extensive operation.4

Following successful nonsurgical management of complicated appendicitis, the surgeon must decide whether to perform an interval appendectomy. The most common reason cited for an interval appendectomy is the prevention of recurrent appendicitis. Counterarguments are the relatively high cure rate with nonoperative management (75%-93%) and avoidance of the cost and risk of surgery.4,5 Another less frequently considered indication for interval appendectomy is the potential to identify whether the appendicitis has a malignant origin.

Tumors are a relatively rare cause of acute appendicitis, with an estimated incidence of 0.7% to 1.7% of all appendectomies.611 However, the unique anatomy of the appendix (long, thin-walled, and tubular) makes it easy for tumors to infiltrate through the wall or obstruct the appendiceal lumen, leading to dilatation and perforation. The most common presentation of appendiceal neoplasms is a history of right-lower-quadrant pain and/or appendicitis. Furthermore, studies have suggested an increased incidence of appendiceal tumors in adult patients undergoing interval appendectomy compared with patients undergoing immediate appendectomy for simple appendicitis.12 To determine the incidence of appendiceal neoplasms in complicated appendicitis, this study reviewed the pathology data in all adult patients undergoing immediate and interval appendectomies for acute appendicitis during a 5-year period at a single tertiary care center.

This was a retrospective study of all patients 18 years or older who underwent appendectomy for presumed acute appendicitis during a 5-year period (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2010) at a single tertiary care center. Patient demographics, including age at the time of the appendectomy and sex, were collected in addition to the timing of the appendectomy (immediate [≤48 hours after admission] vs interval appendectomy), surgical technique (laparoscopic vs open), surgical pathology data, complications, and length of hospitalization. Pathology reports were reviewed individually to determine the etiology of appendicitis for each patient. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS statistical software (version 9.2; SAS Institute, Inc). Groups were compared using the χ2 test or paired t test as indicated. P < .05 was considered statistically significant in all analyses.

In all, 376 patients underwent appendectomy during the study period (Table 1). Twenty-six surgeons were involved in the management of appendectomy for these patients. The mean patient age was 41 years (range, 18 to 94 years), and 182 (48.4%) were men. Open appendectomies were performed in 191 patients (50.8%), 170 (45.2%) were performed laparoscopically, and 15 (4.0%) were initiated laparoscopically and converted to an open procedure. The negative appendicitis rate (no pathologic evidence of appendicitis) was 2.7% (n = 10). Seventeen patients (4.5%) underwent interval appendectomy. The mean time to interval appendectomy was 9 weeks (range, 3-20 weeks). Six of the 17 appendectomies (35.3%) were performed as open procedures, and 11 (64.7%) were performed laparoscopically. The most common indication for interval management was right-lower-quadrant pain with an associated phlegmon or abscess seen on computed tomography (n = 15).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1.  Characteristics and Demographic Data of Patient Population

Complications were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.13 The overall complication rate was 6.1% (n = 23). Of these, there were 18 (78.3%) grade I, 4 (17.4%) grade II, and 1 (4.3%) grade III complications. No grade IV or V complications were identified. The most common complications were wound infections (8 patients [34.7%]), small-bowel obstructions (5 [21.7%]), and intra-abdominal abscess (3 [13.1%]). The only complication in the interval appendectomy subgroup (5.9%) was an intra-abdominal abscess. The mean length of stay for all patients undergoing appendectomy was 1.8 days (range, 1-38 days); the mean length of stay for patients undergoing immediate appendectomy was 1.9 days (range, 1-38 days) and for interval appendectomy, 1.4 days (range, 1-3 days) (P = .11).

Fourteen neoplasms (3.7%) were found on pathologic analysis after the 376 appendectomies: 6 (42.9%) mucinous adenocarcinomas, 3 (21.4%) mucinous cystadenomas, 2 (14.3%) carcinoid tumors, 2 (14.3%) metastatic endocervical and lung lesions, and 1 lymphoma (7.1%) (Table 2). Five tumors occurred among the 17 patients who underwent interval appendectomies (29.4%), and 9 occurred among the 359 patients who underwent immediate appendectomy (2.5%) (P < .001) (Figure). Six of the tumors occurred in men (42.9%). The mean age of all patients with appendiceal tumors was 49 years (range, 35-74 years). There was no significant difference in the mean age for patients with appendiceal tumors in the immediate vs interval appendectomy groups (P = .36). None of the tumors in the immediate appendectomy group were associated with perforation or abscess. All 5 tumors that occurred in patients who underwent interval appendectomy were mucinous adenocarcinomas or mucinous cystadenomas.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2.  Incidence and Type of Appendiceal Neoplasm by Age
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Pathologic Findings in Patients Who Underwent Immediate (n = 359) vs Interval (n = 17) Appendectomy
Graphic Jump Location

Although appendicitis is one of the most common presenting signs of an appendiceal tumor, appendiceal tumors are a relatively rare cause of appendicitis. This study demonstrates a 3.7% incidence of appendiceal tumors in all patients undergoing appendectomy for presumed appendicitis at a single tertiary care institution. In patients who underwent interval appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, the incidence of appendiceal tumors was 29.4% compared with 2.5% in patients with simple appendicitis. Although these incidences are high relative to those reported in larger studies, they are almost identical to those found by Carpenter et al,12 suggesting that these results are not unique to one institution. Consequently, these results should encourage surgeons to carefully consider performing interval appendectomy in adult patients, especially those 40 years or older.

The role of interval appendectomy after successful nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis is still debated. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Andersson and Petzold4 showed a 7.4% incidence of recurrent appendicitis and a 1.2% incidence of malignant neoplasm in patients with successful nonoperative management of complicated appendicitis. Based on these findings, the authors concluded that interval appendectomy is not necessary. Lien et al14 reviewed the medical records of 128 adult patients who received nonoperative treatment for acute appendicitis. Twenty (15.6%) of the patients experienced recurrent appendicitis, and the authors identified male sex as a significant risk factor for recurrence. They did not identify any appendiceal malignant neoplasms and concluded that routine interval appendectomy is not indicated. Similarly, Tekin et al15 evaluated the data for 94 patients with a mass in the right lower quadrant. Only 6 patients (6.7%) experienced recurrent appendicitis, and no malignant tumors were identified. As in the other studies, Tekin and colleagues concluded that routine interval appendectomy is not necessary. We agree that interval appendectomy may not be indicated for the prevention of a less than 10% risk of recurrent appendicitis, especially when appendicitis has been shown to be treated with less morbidity at the time of recurrence than by planned interval appendectomy.16 However, we are concerned that the incidence of malignant neoplasm may be underestimated in most studies given the inclusion of pediatric patients, the lack of surgical pathology data, and the time and follow-up required to identify an appendiceal malignant neoplasm.

As in our study, the study by Carpenter et al12 demonstrates a remarkably high incidence of appendiceal tumors (overall, 2.5%) in both the immediate appendectomy group (1.0%) and the interval appendectomy group (27.7%). In addition, they found a similar association between increased age and the incidence of noncarcinoid malignant neoplasms. Currently, there are no known environmental risk factors for appendiceal cancer. In addition, no hereditary components or genetic pathways have been identified. One study17 has suggested a relationship between the presence of Helicobacter pylori bacteria and the development of pseudomyxoma peritonei of appendiceal origin; however, a causal effect of H pylori has yet to be demonstrated. The 2 institutions at which these studies were performed are in geographically distinct regions of the United States (the desert Southwest and New England), suggesting that these are not isolated, region-specific findings. A multi-institutional study incorporating patients from different geographic regions and environmental settings could provide valuable information about the necessity of interval appendectomy, as well as potentially identify risk factors for appendiceal tumors.

We recognize that our study has limitations. First, it was a retrospective study. Second, the study population was relatively small, with only 17 interval appendectomies. Third, we did not identify patients for whom appendicitis was managed nonoperatively and who also did not undergo interval appendectomy. However, we are aware of at least 2 adult patients at our institution with complex appendicitis who did not undergo interval appendectomies and who later presented for stage IV appendiceal cancer within the study period. Consequently, like Carpenter et al,12 we believe that the findings of these 2 studies should prompt surgeons to regularly perform interval appendectomies, especially in patients 40 years or older.

Corresponding Author: Laura A. Lambert, MD, Division of Surgical Oncology, UMass Memorial Medical Center, 119 Belmont St, Swift House, Worcester, MA 01605 (laura.lambert@umassmemorial.org).

Accepted for Publication: October 26, 2012.

Published Online: June 5, 2013. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.1212.

Author Contributions: Study concept and design: All authors.

Acquisition of data: Furman, Cohen, and Lambert.

Analysis and interpretation of data: Furman and Lambert.

Drafting of the manuscript: Furman and Lambert.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Furman.

Administrative, technical, and material support: Furman and Lambert.

Study supervision: Furman, Cahan, and Lambert.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Previous Presentation: This paper was presented in poster format at the 93rd Annual Meeting of the New England Surgical Society; September 21-22, 2012; Rockport, Maine; and is published after peer review and revision.

Hansson  LE, Laurell  H, Gunnarsson  U.  Impact of time in the development of acute appendicitis. Dig Surg. 2008;25(5):394-399.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Addiss  DG, Shaffer  N, Fowler  BS, Tauxe  RV.  The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132(5):910-925.
PubMed
Ohmann  C, Franke  C, Kraemer  M, Yang  Q.  Status report on epidemiology of acute appendicitis [in German]. Chirurg. 2002;73(8):769-776.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Andersson  RE, Petzold  MG.  Nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2007;246(5):741-748.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lai  HW, Loong  CC, Chiu  JH, Chau  GY, Wu  CW, Lui  WY.  Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. World J Surg. 2006;30(3):352-357.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Connor  SJ, Hanna  GB, Frizelle  FA.  Appendiceal tumors: retrospective clinicopathologic analysis of appendiceal tumors from 7,970 appendectomies. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(1):75-80.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Whitfield  C, Amin  S, Garner  J.  Surgical management of primary appendiceal malignancy. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14(12):1507-1511.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hananel  N, Powsner  E, Wolloch  Y.  Primary appendiceal neoplasms. Isr J Med Sci. 1993;29(11):733-734.
PubMed
Bucher  P, Mathe  Z, Demirag  A, Morel  P.  Appendix tumors in the era of laparoscopic appendectomy. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(7):1063-1066.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smeenk  RM, van Velthuysen  ML, Verwaal  VJ, Zoetmulder  FA.  Appendiceal neoplasms and pseudomyxoma peritonei: a population based study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(2):196-201.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tchana-Sato  V, Detry  O, Polus  M,  et al.  Carcinoid tumor of the appendix: a consecutive series from 1237 appendectomies. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(41):6699-6701.
PubMed
Carpenter  SG, Chapital  AB, Merritt  MV, Johnson  DJ.  Increased risk of neoplasm in appendicitis treated with interval appendectomy: single-institution experience and literature review. Am Surg. 2012;78(3):339-343.
PubMed
Dindo  D, Demartines  N, Clavien  PA.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205-213.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lien  WC, Lee  WC, Wang  HP, Chen  YC, Liu  KL, Chen  CJ.  Male gender is a risk factor for recurrent appendicitis following nonoperative treatment. World J Surg. 2011;35(7):1636-1642.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tekin  A, Kurtoğlu  HC, Can  I, Oztan  S.  Routine interval appendectomy is unnecessary after conservative treatment of appendiceal mass. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(5):465-468.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Dixon  MR, Haukoos  JS, Park  IU,  et al.  An assessment of the severity of recurrent appendicitis. Am J Surg. 2003;186(6):718-722.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Semino-Mora  C, Liu  H, McAvoy  T,  et al.  Pseudomyxoma peritonei: is disease progression related to microbial agents? a study of bacteria, MUC2 AND MUC5AC expression in disseminated peritoneal adenomucinosis and peritoneal mucinous carcinomatosis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(5):1414-1423.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Pathologic Findings in Patients Who Underwent Immediate (n = 359) vs Interval (n = 17) Appendectomy
Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1.  Characteristics and Demographic Data of Patient Population
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2.  Incidence and Type of Appendiceal Neoplasm by Age

References

Hansson  LE, Laurell  H, Gunnarsson  U.  Impact of time in the development of acute appendicitis. Dig Surg. 2008;25(5):394-399.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Addiss  DG, Shaffer  N, Fowler  BS, Tauxe  RV.  The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132(5):910-925.
PubMed
Ohmann  C, Franke  C, Kraemer  M, Yang  Q.  Status report on epidemiology of acute appendicitis [in German]. Chirurg. 2002;73(8):769-776.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Andersson  RE, Petzold  MG.  Nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2007;246(5):741-748.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lai  HW, Loong  CC, Chiu  JH, Chau  GY, Wu  CW, Lui  WY.  Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. World J Surg. 2006;30(3):352-357.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Connor  SJ, Hanna  GB, Frizelle  FA.  Appendiceal tumors: retrospective clinicopathologic analysis of appendiceal tumors from 7,970 appendectomies. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(1):75-80.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Whitfield  C, Amin  S, Garner  J.  Surgical management of primary appendiceal malignancy. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14(12):1507-1511.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hananel  N, Powsner  E, Wolloch  Y.  Primary appendiceal neoplasms. Isr J Med Sci. 1993;29(11):733-734.
PubMed
Bucher  P, Mathe  Z, Demirag  A, Morel  P.  Appendix tumors in the era of laparoscopic appendectomy. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(7):1063-1066.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smeenk  RM, van Velthuysen  ML, Verwaal  VJ, Zoetmulder  FA.  Appendiceal neoplasms and pseudomyxoma peritonei: a population based study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(2):196-201.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tchana-Sato  V, Detry  O, Polus  M,  et al.  Carcinoid tumor of the appendix: a consecutive series from 1237 appendectomies. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(41):6699-6701.
PubMed
Carpenter  SG, Chapital  AB, Merritt  MV, Johnson  DJ.  Increased risk of neoplasm in appendicitis treated with interval appendectomy: single-institution experience and literature review. Am Surg. 2012;78(3):339-343.
PubMed
Dindo  D, Demartines  N, Clavien  PA.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205-213.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lien  WC, Lee  WC, Wang  HP, Chen  YC, Liu  KL, Chen  CJ.  Male gender is a risk factor for recurrent appendicitis following nonoperative treatment. World J Surg. 2011;35(7):1636-1642.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tekin  A, Kurtoğlu  HC, Can  I, Oztan  S.  Routine interval appendectomy is unnecessary after conservative treatment of appendiceal mass. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(5):465-468.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Dixon  MR, Haukoos  JS, Park  IU,  et al.  An assessment of the severity of recurrent appendicitis. Am J Surg. 2003;186(6):718-722.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Semino-Mora  C, Liu  H, McAvoy  T,  et al.  Pseudomyxoma peritonei: is disease progression related to microbial agents? a study of bacteria, MUC2 AND MUC5AC expression in disseminated peritoneal adenomucinosis and peritoneal mucinous carcinomatosis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(5):1414-1423.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment
when the appendix is more than inflamed.
Posted on June 6, 2013
basil b fadipe
justin fadipe centre. dominica. West Indies
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
This study, small sample evidence as it is, is a welcome alert to revise prevailing instinct that assumes appendicitis always has an inflammatory basis. Though by far the dominant affliction of the clinical appendix is primary inflammation, there are secondary drivers of the inflammation from time to time including midgut carcinoids that should persuade towards removing a clinical appendix as a primary or secondary(interval) procedure.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles