Acute appendicitis is the most common condition that presents with an acute abdomen needing emergency surgery. Despite this common presentation, correctly diagnosing appendicitis remains a challenge as clinical signs or positive blood results can be absent in 55% of the patients. The reported proportion of missed diagnoses of appendicitis ranges between 20% and 40%. A delay or mis-diagnosis of appendicitis can result in severe complications such as perforation, abscess formation, sepsis, and intra-abdominal adhesions. Literature has shown that patients who had a negative appendectomy suffer post-op complications and infections secondary to hospital stays; there have even been reported cases of fatality. It is therefore crucial that timely and accurate diagnosis of appendicitis is achieved to avoid complications of both non-operating as well as unnecessary surgical intervention. The aim of this review is to systematically report and analyse the latest evidence on the different approaches used in diagnosing appendicitis. We include discussions of clinical scoring systems, laboratory tests, latest innovative bio-markers and radiological imaging.

Background The outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy have not been adequately compared with those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We performed a meta‐analysis to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of these two pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures specifically in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods Before this study was initiated, a specific protocol was designed and has been registered in PROSEPRO (ID: CRD42020149438). Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1994 and October 2019. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and time to commencing adjuvant chemotherapy were the primary endpoint measurements, whereas perioperative and short-term outcomes were the secondary endpoints. Results The final analysis included 9 retrospective cohorts comprising 11,242 patients (1377 who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy and 9865 who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy). There were no significant differences in the patients’ overall survival, operative time, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, rate of vein resection, number of harvested lymph nodes, or rate of positive lymph nodes between the two approaches. However, disease-free survival, time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, and rate of negative margins in patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy showed improvements relative to those in patients who underwent open surgery. Conclusions Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy provides similar or even improved perioperative, short-term, and long-term oncological outcomes when compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

The outcomes of children with Choledochal cyst who undergo laparoscopic cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy versus open cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy have not been adequately compared. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to gain further insight into the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic excision in children with choledochal cysts. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials. gov databases from January 1973 to January 31, 2020 was performed utilizing the PRISMA guidelines. Short-term, long-term and total postoperative complications were the primary endpoint measurements, whereas intraoperative outcomes and other postoperative outcomes were the secondary endpoints. Results The final analysis included 14 retrospective cohorts comprising 1767 patients. There were no significant differences in the patients' short-term postoperative complications (RR =-1.08; 95% CI =-1.72 to-0.67) between the 2 approaches. However, improvements in long-term (RR = 0.09; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.18) and total postoperative complications (RR =-0.29; 95% CI =-0.40 to-0.21), estimated intraoperative blood loss and transfusion, time of initial feeding, and length of hospital stay were observed in patients who underwent laparoscopic excision when compared to those who underwent open surgery.