Please wait a minute...
European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology  2018, Vol. 39 Issue (3): 386-389    DOI: 10.12892/ejgo4244.2018
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Incidental appendectomy at the time of gynecologic surgery
M.F. Benoit1, *(), K.A. O'Hanlan2, M.S. Sten2, C.L. Kosnik1, D.M. Struck2, M.S. O'Holleran3, J. Cuff4, D.M. Halliday2, E.A. Kent1
1 Division of Gynecologic Oncology Kaiser Permanente Washington, WA, USA
2 Laparoscopic Institute for Gynecology and Oncology, Portola Valley, CA, USA
3 Redwood Shores Surgery, Redwood City, CA, USA
4 Peninsular Medical Group Pathologist, South San Francisco, CA, USA
Download:  PDF(102KB)  ( 87 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Purpose of Investigation: This study was performed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of incidental appendectomy in a high risk gynecologic and gynecologic oncology patient population. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective review evaluating 3,210 patients. Data reviewed included: age, preoperative diagnosis, route of surgery, procedure performed, length of stay, BMI, complications, and final diagnosis. Data was abstracted and analyzed; Mann-Whitney U and t-test were used to calculate outcomes. Significance was set at a p < 0.05 for each statistical test. Results: This study included 1,876 appendectomies that were performed at the time of gynecologic surgery. Eighty-two percent of procedures were performed laparoscopically. A high rate of abnormal pathology was identified: there were 32 (1.7%) primary appendiceal cancers identified, gynecologic cancer metastasis was identified in 71 (3.8%) patients, 12 (0.6%) patients had metastatic other cancer to the appendix, 40 (2.1%) patients had appendiceal endometriosis, and 25 (1.3%) patients had appendicitis. The total number of patients with significant appendiceal pathology was 221 (11.8%). No complications were attributed to the appendectomy procedure itself. BMI was not related to the ability to perform appendectomy (t-test, p = 0.9960), nor was route of surgery (t-test, p = 0.9256). Length of stay in the laparoscopic cohort was shorter for those who underwent appendectomy. Conclusions: Incidental appendectomy during gynecologic surgery is safe and feasible. This study documents that safety in an especially high risk gynecologic and oncologic patient cohort. This procedure can be routinely offered to address the increasing rate of acute appendicitis, occult malignancy, contribute to cancer debulking, and diagnose etiology of chronic pelvic pain in women concordant with their gynecologic surgery.
Key words:  Appendectomy      Incidental      Gynecology      Cancer      Feasible      Safe     
Published:  10 June 2018     
*Corresponding Author(s):  M.F. BENOIT     E-mail:  benoit.m@ghc.org

Cite this article: 

M.F. Benoit, K.A. O'Hanlan, M.S. Sten, C.L. Kosnik, D.M. Struck, M.S. O'Holleran, J. Cuff, D.M. Halliday, E.A. Kent. Incidental appendectomy at the time of gynecologic surgery. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2018, 39(3): 386-389.

URL: 

https://ejgo.imrpress.com/EN/10.12892/ejgo4244.2018     OR     https://ejgo.imrpress.com/EN/Y2018/V39/I3/386

[1] Xiao-Peng Yu, Cai-Gang Liu, Fang Qiu, Fei Xing, Si-Jia Han, Ye Han, Gui-Jin He. Breast cancer overall-survival can be predicted with a 19 lncRNA tissue signature[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 838-843.
[2] Plotti Francesco, Bartolone Martina, Terranova Corrado, Guzzo Federica, De Cicco Nardone Carlo, Montera Roberto, Molinaro Michele, Ciccozzi Massimo, Benvenuto Domenico, Di Donato Violante, Benedetti Panici Pierluigi, Angioli Roberto. Effectiveness of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) as predictor of response to first line platinum based chemotherapy[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 844-849.
[3] Burak Tatar. Risk of nodal metastasis associated with lymphovascular space invasion in endometrial cancer[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 850-854.
[4] Seda Yuksel Simsek, Ozan Cem Guler, Gülşen Doğan Durdag, Sezin Yüce Sari, Melis Gultekin, Ferah Yildiz, Husnu Celik, Gurcan Erbay, Huseyin Cem Onal. The clinical outcomes of ovarian cancer in patients with brain metastasis[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 881-886.
[5] Jaswinder Chalia, Musse Hussein, Mariya Farooqui, Jordan Mattson, Sally A. Mullany, Molly E. Klein, Boris Winterhoff, Mahmoud A. Khalifa. Concurrent immunohistochemical testing of L1CAM and MMR proteins adds value in risk stratification of endometrial cancer: a proof of concept[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 887-892.
[6] Yumiko Goto, Yoshie Kametani, Aurélie Auguste, Thuraya Almamari, Audrey LeFormal, Shun-ichiro Izumi, Catherine Genestie, Hitoshi Ishimoto, Mikio Mikami, Alexandra Leary. Tropomyosin-related kinase B (TrkB) full-length isoform is related to advanced-stage clear cell ovarian cancer (CCOC)[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 899-908.
[7] Luibov.I. Korolenkova, Ivan.S. Stilidi, Inna.N. Lazareva. Diagnostic value of colposcopy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2–3/carcinoma in situ and microinvasive cervical cancer[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 909-916.
[8] Kelly Baillie, Nicholas Reed, Jiafeng Pan, Jennifer Laskey, Marion Bennie, Christine Crearie, Tanja Mueller, Kimberley Kavanagh, Nadeem Siddiqui, Kevin Burton, John Telfer, Rhona Lindsay, Smruta Shanbhag, Rosie Harrand, Azmat Sadozye, Kathryn Graham. Retrospective cohort study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by tailored surgery in locally advanced sphincter-threatening vulval cancer: an alternative to exenteration?[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 917-925.
[9] Kelly Baillie, Nicholas Reed, Jennifer Laskey, Jiafeng Pan, Kimberley Kavanagh, Marion Bennie, Christine Crearie, Tanja Mueller, Azmat Sadozye, Rosie Harrand, Ashleigh Kerr, Kathryn Graham. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: real-world data from the Cancer Medicines Outcomes Programme (CMOP)[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 926-935.
[10] Elif Eda Ozer, Melisa Bagci, Esengul Kocak Uzel, Gulsen Pinar Soydemir, Metin Figen, Meltem Kirli Bolukbas. Comparison of point a based plans with clinical target volume-based three-dimensional plans using dose—volume parameters in small lesion of cervical cancer brachyterapy[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 936-942.
[11] Polo Cornelisz Vermolen, Nienke E. van Trommel, Wouter V. Vogel, Judit A. Adam, Jacobus van der Velden, Constantijne H. Mom. The issue of false positive lymph nodes on [18F] FDG-PET/CT for cervical carcinoma and consequences for treatment[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 943-950.
[12] Jing Fang, Jinmei Fang, Ailin Wu, Yufei Zhao, Yun Liu. Clinical analysis of predisposing factors for radiation enteritis in patients with cervical cancer[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 951-956.
[13] Danping Qian, Yin Zhu, Le Xu, Tingting Dong, Ting Chen, Zhenghong Yu. Icariin induces apoptosis in breast cancer MCF-7 cells by regulating the MELK mediated PI3K/AKT signaling pathway[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 957-965.
[14] Felix Chan, Cherynne Yuin Mun Johansson. Single-site robotic-assisted hysterectomy and sentinel lymph node mapping for low-risk endometrial cancer: surgical technique and preliminary outcomes[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 966-972.
[15] Priscila Thais Silva Mantoani, Daniela Rodrigues Siqueira, Millena Prata Jammal, Eddie Fernando Candido Murta, Rosekeila Simões Nomelini. Immune response in cervical intraepithelial neoplasms[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2021, 42(5): 973-981.
No Suggested Reading articles found!