Akut Apendisit Ön Tanısıyla Ameliyat Edilen 160 Olgunun Retrospektif Analizi

Year 2020, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 56 - 59, 01.01.2020

Turgay Karataş Davut Özbağ Murat Kanlıöz

Abstract

Bu retrospektif çalışmada amacımız, akut apendisit ön tanısıyla opere edilen 160 olgunun ameliyat bulgularının ve bunların sonuçlarının analizini sunmaktır. Mart 2000 ile Aralık 2011 arasında Genel Cerrahi Kliniğinde akut apendisit ön tanısıyla ameliyat edilen 160 hastanın retrospektif olarak dosyaları ve ameliyat notları incelendi. Cinsiyet, yaş, ameliyat bulguları kaydedildi. Ameliyat edilen hastaların %68.1’i erkek, %31.8’i kadındı. Hastaların median yaşı 35.3 idi. Hastaların %65.6’inde akut, %24.3’ünde perfore, %3.1’inde plastrone, %1.8’inde gangrenöz apendisit
saptandı. Hastaların % 0.9’unda apendiks mukoseline rastlandı. %4.3’ünde ise apendisit saptanmadı. Hastaların %81.7’inde apendiks çekumun anterioru ya da anterio-medialinde, %18.2’inde ise retroçekal bölgedeydi. Retroçekal apendisit erkeklerde daha fazlaydı. Erkek hastaların %27.5’inde, kadınların %17.6’sında perfore apendisite rastlandı. Retroçekal apendisitlerde perforasyon oranı daha yüksekti (%41.3). Anterior yerleşimlilerde bu oran daha düşüktü (%20.7). Sonuç olarak, akut apendisit vakalarında, morbidite ve mortaliteyi azaltmak için tanı ve tedavi sürecinde çok dikkatli davranmak gerekmektedir.

Keywords

Akut Apendisit, Perfore Apendisit, RetroçekalApendiks

Retrospective Analysis of 160 Cases Who Underwent Operation with the Pre-Diagnosis Of Apendicitis

Abstract

In this retrospective study, we aimed to present the analysis of the surgical findings and results of 160 patients who were operated on with the preliminary diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Between March 2000 and December 2011, 160 patients who underwent surgery for the pre-diagnosis of acute apendicitis files and operation notes were analysed retrospectiveyl in department of general surgery. Gender, ages, operative findings were recorded. Of the patients who were operated, 68.1% were male and 31.8% were female. The median age of the patients was 35.3 years. 65.6% of patients had acute, 24.3% perforated, 3.1% plastrone, 1.8% gangrenous appendicitis. 0.9% of the patients had mucocele of the appendix. Appendicitis was not detected in 4.3%. In 81.7% of the patients, the appendix was in the anterior or anterio-medial region of the caecum and in 18.2% it was in the retrocecal region. Retroceacal apendicitis was more frequent in male. Perforated appendicitis was found in 27.5% of male patients and 17.6% of female patients. The rate of perforation was higher in retrocecal appendicitis (41.3%). This rate was lower in patients with anterior location (20.7%). In conclusion, in order to reduce morbidity and mortality in acute appendicitis cases, it is necessary to be very careful in the diagnosis and treatment process.

Keywords

Acute appendicitis, perforated appendicitis, retrocecal appendix

References

• 1. Fitz RH. Perforating inflammation of the vermi form appendix: With special reference to its early diagnosis and treatment. Trans Assoc Am Physicians1886; 1:107-144.
• 2. Addis DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, et al. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990; 132: 910-25.
• 3. Engin O, Muratli A, Ucar AD, et al. The importance of fecaliths in theaetiology of acute appendicitis. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2012; 107(6):756-60
• 4. Herscu G, Kong A, Russel D, et al. Retrocecal appendix location and perforation at presentation. Am Surg. 2006; 72(10): 890-3.
• 5. Willmore WS, Hill AG. Acutea ppendicitis in Kenyanrural hospital. East AfrMed J. 2001; 78(7): 355-7.
• 6. Korner H, Sondenaa K, Soreide JA, et al. Incidence of acute non-perforated and perforated apendicitis: Age-spesific and sexspesific analysis. World J Surg 1997; 21:313- 317.
• 7. Chamisa I. A clinicopathological review of 324 appendices removed for acute appendicitis in Durban, South Africa: a retrospective analysis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2009; 91(8): 688-92.
• 8. Flum DR, Koepsell T. The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitis. Arch Surg. 2002; 137: 799-804.
• 9. Wakeley CPG. The position of the vermi form appendix as certained by an analysis of 10.000 cases. J Anat 1933; 67: 277.
• 10. O’Connor CE, Reed WP. Invivo location of the human appendix vermiformis. Clin Anat 1994; 7: 139-142.
• 11. Ajmani ML, Ajmani K. The position, length and arterial supply of vermi form appendix. Anat Anz (Jena) 1983; 153: 369-74.
• 12. Collins DC. The length and position of the vermi form appendix: a study of 4680 specimens. Ann Surg 1932; 96: 1044-48
• 13. Maisel H. The position of the human vermi form appendix in fetal and adult age groups. Anat Rec 1960; 136: 385.
• 14. Grunditz T, Ryden CI, Janzon L. Does the retrocecal position influnce the course of acute appendicitis. Acta Chir Scand. 1983; 149(7): 707-10
• 15. Guidry SP, Poole GV. The anatomy of appendicitis. Am Surg.1994; 60(1): 68-71
• 16. Seetahal SA, Bolorunduro OB, Sookdeo TC, et al. Negative appendectomy: a 10-year review of nationally representative sample. Am J Surg. 2011; 201(4): 433-7.
• 17. Graff L, Russel J, Seashore J, et al. Falsenegative and false-positive errors in abdominal pain evaluation: failure to diagnose acuteappendicitis and unnecesary surgery. Acad Emerg Med. 2000; 7(11): 1244-55.
• 18. Dhupar R, Evankovich J, Ochoa JB, et al. Outcomes of operative management of appendicitis. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2012; 13(3):141-6