International Journal of Colorectal Disease

, Volume 34, Issue 7, pp 1325–1332 | Cite as

Predictors for interval appendectomy in non-operatively treated complicated appendicitis

  • J. de JongeEmail author
  • M. D. M. Bolmers
  • G. D. Musters
  • C. C. van Rossem
  • W. A. Bemelman
  • A. A. W. van Geloven
Original Article



To determine the incidence rate and identify predictive factors for interval appendectomy after non-operatively treated complicated appendicitis.


Single-center retrospective cohort study conducted between January 2008 and June 2017. Adult patients with acute appendicitis were identified. Patients with complicated appendicitis initially treated non-operatively were included. Outcomes included abscess rate on imaging, results of additional imaging during follow-up, incidence rate of and surgical indications for interval appendectomy, and outcomes of histological reports.


Of all adult patients with acute appendicitis (n = 1839), 9% (170/1839) was initially treated non-operatively. Median age of these patients was 55 years (IQR 42–65) and 48.8% (83/170) were men. In 36.4% (62/170) of the patients, an appendicular abscess was diagnosed. 62.4% (106/170) did not require subsequent surgery (no interval appendectomy group) and in 37.6% (64/170), an interval appendectomy was performed (interval appendectomy group). Median follow-up was 80 weeks (17–192) and 113 weeks (34–246), respectively. Most frequent reason to perform subsequent surgery was recurrent appendicitis (45% (29/64)). Increasing age was significantly associated with a lower risk of undergoing interval appendectomy (OR 0.7; CI 0.6–0.89); p = 0.002). In the interval appendectomy group, appendicular neoplasm was found in 11% (7/64) of the patients, in contrast to 1.5% (25/1669) of the patients that had acute surgery (p < 0.001).


One out of three patients non-operatively treated for complicated appendicitis required an interval appendectomy. The incidence of appendicular neoplasms was high in these patients compared with those that had acute surgery. Therefore, additional radiological imaging following non-operatively treated complicated appendicitis is recommended.


Appendicitis Inflammatory mass Non-operative treatment Interval appendectomy Appendicular neoplasm 


Author contributions

Drs de Jonge and Bolmers had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: all authors.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: all authors.

Drafting of the manuscript: all authors.

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

Statistical analysis: de Jonge, Bolmers.

Administrative, technical, or material support: -

Study supervision: van Geloven, Bemelman.

Compliance with ethical standards

Dutch regulations did not require review by the medical ethical board or written informed consent.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

The medical ethics committee approved the original study and no informed consent was necessary because of the observational design. Dutch regulations did not require review by the medical ethical board or written informed consent.


  1. 1.
    Buckius MT, McGrath B, Monk J, Grim R, Bell T, Ahuja V (2012) Changing epidemiology of acute appendicitis in the United States: study period 1993-2008. J Surg Res 175:185–190. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andersson RE, Petzold MG (2007) Nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon. Ann Surg 246:741–748. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaminski A, Liu ILA, Applebaum H, Lee SL, Haigh PI (2005) Routine interval appendectomy is not justified after initial nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis. Arch Surg 140(9):897–901. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bakker OJ, Go PM, Puylaert JB, Kazemier G, Heij HA (2010) Richtlijn voor diagnostiek en behandeling van acute appendicitis. Beeldvorming voor appendectomie aanbevolen. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 154:A303Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simillis C, Symeonides P, Shorthouse AJ, Tekkis PP (2010) A meta-analysis comparing conservative treatment versus acute appendectomy for complicated appendicitis (abscess or phlegmon). Surgery 147:818–829. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mentula P, Sammalkorpi H, Leppäniemi A (2015) Laparoscopic surgery or conservative treatment for appendiceal abscess in adults? A randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 262(2):237–242. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheng Y, Xiong X, Lu J, Wu S, Zhou R, Cheng N (2017) Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
  8. 8.
    Darwazeh G, Cunningham SC, Kowdley GC (2016) A systematic review of perforated appendicitis and phlegmon: interval appendectomy or wait-and-see? Am Surg 82(1):11–15Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wright GP, Mater ME, Carroll JT, Choy JS, Chung MH (2015) Is there truly an oncologic indication for interval appendectomy? Am J Surg 209:442–446. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Furman MJ, Cahan M, Cohen P, Lambert LA (2013) Increased risk of mucinous neoplasm of the appendix in adults undergoing interval appendectomy. JAMA Surg 148(8):703–706. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lai HW, Loong CC, Chiu JH, Chau GY, Wu CW, Lui WY (2006) Interval appendectomy after conservative treatment of an appendiceal mass. World J Surg 30:352–357. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    José F, Teixeira R Jr, Dias S et al (2017) Acute appendicitis, inflammatory appendiceal mass and the risk of a hidden malignant tumor: a systematic review of the literature. World J Emerg Surg 12:12
  13. 13.
    Carpenter SG, Chapital AB, Merritt MV, Johnson DJ (2012) Increased risk of neoplasm in appendicitis treated with interval appendectomy: single-institution experience and literature review. Am Surg 78(3):339–343Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Connor SJ, Hanna GB, Frizelle FA (1998) Appendiceal tumors retrospective clinicopathologic analysis of appendiceal tumors from 7,970 appendectomies. Dis Colon Rectum 41:75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murphy EMA, Farquharson SM, Moran BJ (2006) Management of an unexpected appendiceal neoplasm. Br J Surg 93:783–792. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fried E, Gurtin ME (2011) Subito copyright regulations. Ultraschall Der Medizin 40(2):154–157. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, De Oliveira ML et al (2009) The clavien-dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carr NJ, Sobin LH (2010) Tumours of the appendix. In: Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH, Theise ND (eds) WHO Classification of tumours of the digestive system, 4th edn. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours, vol 3. Lyon, France: IARC Press, pp 122–125Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deelder JD, Richir MC, Schoorl T, Schreurs WH (2014) How to treat an appendiceal inflammatory mass: operatively or nonoperatively? J Gastrointest Surg 18:641–645. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Enblad M, Birgisson H, Ekbom A, Sandin F, Graf W (2017) Increased incidence of bowel cancer after non-surgical treatment of appendicitis. Eur J Surg Oncol 43(11):2067–2075. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ito H, Osteen RT, Bleday R, Zinner MJ, Ashley SW, Whang EE (2004) Appendiceal adenocarcinoma: long-term outcomes after surgical therapy. Dis Colon Rectum 47(4):474–480. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Clift AK, Frilling A (2017) Neuroendocrine, goblet cell and mixed adeno-neuroendocrine tumours of the appendix: updates, clinical applications and the future. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol:1–11.
  23. 23.
    Moertel G, Dockerty B (1965) Carcinoid tumors of the vermiform appendix. Cancer. 21(2):270–278.<270::AID-CNCR2820210217>3.0.CO;2-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fumery M, Dulai PS, Gupta S, Prokop LJ, Ramamoorthy S, Sandborn WJ, Singh S (2017) Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis with low-grade dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 15(5):665–674.e5. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. de Jonge
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. D. M. Bolmers
    • 1
  • G. D. Musters
    • 2
  • C. C. van Rossem
    • 3
  • W. A. Bemelman
    • 2
  • A. A. W. van Geloven
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryTergooi Hospital HilversumHilversumThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryAmsterdam University Medical Center, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryMaasstad Hospital RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations