Objective
Early presentation and prompt diagnosis of acute appendicitis are necessary to prevent progression of disease leading to complicated appendicitis. We hypothesize that patients had a delayed presentation of acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected severity of disease on presentation and outcomes.
Patients and methods
We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who were treated for acute appendicitis at Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital (MSCH) between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak in New York City (NYC). For comparison, we reviewed patients treated from March 1, 2019 to May 31, 2019, prior to the pandemic. Demographics and baseline patient characteristics were analyzed for potential confounding variables. Outcomes were collected and grouped into those quantifying severity of illness on presentation to our ED, type of treatment, and associated post-treatment outcomes. Fisher's Exact Test and Kruskal-Wallis Test were used for univariate analysis while cox regression with calculation of hazard ratios was used for multivariate analysis.
Results
A total of 89 patients were included in this study, 41 patients were treated for appendicitis from March 1 to May 31 of 2019 (non-pandemic) and 48 were treated during the same time period in 2020 (pandemic). Duration of symptoms prior to presentation to the ED was significantly longer in patients treated in 2020, with a median of 2 days compared to 1 day (p = 0.003). Additionally, these patients were more likely to present with reported fever (52.1% vs 24.4%, p = 0.009) and had a higher heart rate on presentation with a median of 101 beats per minute (bpm) compared to 91 bpm (p = 0.040). Findings of complicated appendicitis on radiographic imaging including suspicion of perforation (41.7% vs 9.8%, p < 0.001) and intra-abdominal abscess (27.1% vs 7.3%, p = 0.025) were higher in patients presenting in 2020. Patients treated during the pandemic had higher rates of non-operative treatment (25.0% vs 7.3%, p = 0.044) requiring increased antibiotic use and image-guided percutaneous drain placement. They also had longer hospital length of stay by a median of 1 day (p = 0.001) and longer duration until symptom resolution by a median of 1 day (p = 0.004). Type of treatment was not a predictor of LOS (HR = 0.565, 95% CI = 0.357–0.894, p = 0.015) or duration until symptom resolution (HR = 0.630, 95% CI = 0.405–0.979, p = 0.040).
Conclusion
Patients treated for acute appendicitis at our children's hospital during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic presented with more severe disease and experienced suboptimal outcomes compared to those who presented during the same time period in 2019.
Level of Evidence
III
Background/Objectives: The Management of Myelomeningocele (MMC) Study (MOMS) showed that prenatal repair of MMC resulted in improved neurological outcomes but was associated with high rates of obstetrical complications. This study compares outcomes of open and fetoscopic MMC repair. Data Sources: PubMed and Embase studies reporting outcomes of fetal MMC repair published since the completion of the MOMS. Results: We analyzed 11 studies and found no difference in mortality or the rate of shunt placement for hydrocephalus. Percutaneous fetoscopic repair was associated with higher rates of premature rupture of membranes (91 vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and preterm birth (96 vs. 81%, p = 0.04) compared to open repair, whereas fetoscopic repair via maternal laparotomy reduced preterm birth. The rate of dehiscence and leakage from the MMC repair site was higher after both types of fetoscopic surgery (30 vs. 7%, p < 0.01), while the rate of uterine dehiscence was higher after open repair (11 vs. 0%, p < 0.01). Discussion: Fetoscopic repair is a promising alternative to open fetal MMC repair with a lower risk of uterine dehiscence; however, fetoscopic techniques should be optimized to overcome the high rate of dehiscence and leakage at the MMC repair site. A fetoscopic approach via maternal laparotomy reduces the risk of preterm birth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.