Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: The optimal duration of antibiotic agents after appendectomy for simple or complicated (gangrenous or perforated) appendicitis is unknown. We performed a randomized trial to compare a Restrictive to a Liberal post-operative antibiotic strategy, after appendectomy. Methods: Adults undergoing appendectomy were randomized 1:1 to a Restrictive (no post-operative antibiotic agents for simple, up to 1 d for complicated) or Liberal (up to 1 d for simple, 4 d for complicated) strategy. The primary endpoint was on the basis of Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR)/Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk (RADAR), an ordinal scale of mutually exclusive clinical complications with within-category rankings determined by duration of antibiotic exposure. Bayesian cumulative logistic models using a neutral prior were used to assess the Posterior probability (PP) of benefit with a Restrictive strategy. Type of appendicitis (simple vs. complicated) was assessed as an interaction. Results: A total of 346 subjects enrolled from 9 sites were included in the final analysis. Baseline demographics between groups were similar. There were 265 simple and 81 complicated (11 gangrenous) appendicitis cases. The Restrictive strategy, had a cumulative odds ratio of 0.84 (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.42–1.72), a 68% PP that Restrictive tactic reduces (improves) the DOOR category. This was driven by patients with complicated appendicitis with an OR 0.69 (95% CrI: 0.27–1.68), a 79% probability that the Restrictive strategy, reduces DOOR. In the RADAR analysis, the Restrictive strategy, had an 80% PP of a more desirable overall outcome compared with the Liberal strategy. Conclusions: A restrictive post-operative antibiotic strategy, in acute appendicitis resulted in similar to mildly improved clinical outcomes, when compared with a Liberal strategy. The patients who benefitted most from a Restrictive strategy, were patients with complicated appendicitis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yeh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: