OBJECTIVES: To correlate preoperative imaging of fecaliths with what is seen in surgical specimens. BACKGROUND: Early studies considered radiological findings of appendicoliths as a contraindication for nonoperative treatment of appendicitis. There is no standard definition for what is labeled as an appendicolith radiologically and little is known about the pathological correlates of these lesions. METHODS: A single center, retrospective study of a consecutive series of adult patients who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis from March 2021 to February 2022 was performed. The primary outcome was concordance between preoperative cross-sectional imaging description of appendicolith with postoperative gross pathology description. Images were retrospectively reviewed by an independent radiologist, and the presence and characteristics of appendicoliths and appendices were examined. RESULTS: Of 88 cases of appendicitis, 86 were diagnosed preoperatively by computed tomography (CT) imaging. Appendicoliths were seen either on CT or pathology in 45 (51%) patients. Of these 45 patients, a total of 38 (84%) were identified radiographically, and 28 (62%) were identified on pathology. Of the 38 appendicoliths diagnosed on preoperative imaging, only 21 (55%) were confirmed pathologically. Additionally, of the 28 appendicoliths observed on pathology, only 21 (75%) were identified preoperatively on imaging. There was no appendiceal obstruction in 10 of the 40 cases (25%) in which retrospective radiological review identified appendicoliths. CONCLUSIONS: Discrepancies were observed between CT and pathology findings of appendicoliths. Not all appendicoliths seem to cause appendicitis. Because the presence of appendicolith influences the treatment decisions, there is a need to standardize their radiological diagnosis and better understand their pathophysiology.

Background

Previous studies report high rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality among patients with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). With routine preoperative screening, we are identifying an increasing number of patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19. Based on these prior studies, we hypothesized that patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 infections have low perioperative morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality associated with operations performed on patients diagnosed with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective study of patients with asymptomatic/mild SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection diagnosed within 8 days of surgery from March 2020 to February 2021. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included pulmonary complications and perioperative morbidity. The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention criteria of COVID severity was used for categorization.

Results

The initial cohort included 53 patients. COVID-19 infection was detected preoperatively in 86.8%. At admission, 90.5% of patients were asymptomatic, 7.5% had mild COVID-19 symptoms, and 1.9% were unknown due to obtundation and later determined to be asymptomatic. Of the 53 cases, 35.8% were general surgical and 18.9% orthopedic; the remaining 54.7% were other surgical subspecialties. Overall mortality was 0%. New COVID-19 symptoms developed in 13.2% of patients postoperatively, with only 11.3% developing postoperative pulmonary complications.

Conclusion

Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were low among patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19. The risks of nonoperative management should be weighed against these operative risks in such patients with surgical indications.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major threat to public health and traditional bariatric surgery continues to have low utilization. Endoscopic treatments for obesity have emerged that offer less risk, but questions remain regarding efficacy, durability, and safety. We compared the efficacy of endoscopic bariatric procedures as compared to other existing treatments. METHODS: A literature search of Embase, Cochrane Central, and Pubmed was conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 7, 2021, including endoscopic bariatric therapies that were FDA or CE approved at the time of search to non-endoscopic treatments. Thirty-seven studies involving 15,639 patients were included. Primary outcomes included % total body weight loss (%TBWL), % excess body weight loss (%EBWL), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included quality of life data and differences in hemoglobin A1C levels. Strength of clinical trial and observational data were graded according to the Cochrane methods. RESULTS: Intragastric balloons achieved greater %TBWL with a range of 7.6-14.1% compared to 3.3-6.7% with lifestyle modification at 6 months, and 7.5-14.0% compared to 3.1-7.9%, respectively, at 12 months. When endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) was compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), ESG had less %TBWL at 4.7-14.4% compared to 18.8-26.5% after LSG at 6 months, and 4.5-18.6% as compared to 28.4-29.3%, respectively, at 12 months. For the AspireAssist, there was greater %TBWL with aspiration therapy compared to lifestyle modification at 12 months, 12.1-18.3% TBWL versus 3.5-5.9% TBWL, respectively. All endoscopic interventions had higher adverse events rates compared to lifestyle modification. CONCLUSION: This review is the first to evaluate various endoscopic bariatric therapies using only RCTs and observational studies for evaluation of weight loss compared with conservative management, lifestyle modification, and bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies result in greater weight loss compared to lifestyle modification, but not as much as bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies may be beneficial as an alternative to bariatric surgery.