Skip to main content
Log in

Perioperative CRP-Bestimmung bei der Appendektomie

Klinischer Nutzen oder Geldverschwendung?

Perioperative CRP quantification for appendectomy

Clinically useful or a waste of money?

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Der Chirurg Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 30 October 2015

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Die Appendektomie ist die häufigste, nicht elektive Operation in der Allgemeinchirurgie. Trotz des fraglichen Nutzens werden die laborchemischen Entzündungsparameter vor, aber auch nach der Appendektomie häufig bestimmt. So stellt sich regelhaft die Frage, ob Patienten trotz Zunahme der Leukozyten oder des C-reaktiven Proteins im Serum (CRP) entlassen werden können.

Fragestellung

Der prospektive Wert der vor und nach einer Appendektomie erhobenen Entzündungsparameter für das Auftreten von Komplikationen wurde evaluiert.

Material und Methoden

Insgesamt wurden 969 Patienten mit dem Verdacht auf eine akute Appendizitis operativ behandelt. Die Befunde wurden anhand der Patientenakten und im Rahmen qualitätssichernder Maßnahmen gewonnen. Die Leukozyten- und CRP-Werte wurden mit den klinischen und histopathologischen Daten korreliert (t-Test, χ2-Test, Regressionsanalysen, ROC-Kurven).

Ergebnisse und Diskussion

Das operative Trauma, gemessen in der Gruppe ohne akute Entzündung, verursachte einen CRP-Anstieg von medianen 31 mg/dl am 1. und 47 mg/dl am 2. postoperativen Tag. Die Gesamtmorbidität lag bei 6,2 %. Der effektivste prädiktive Parameter für Komplikationen war das CRP mit einem Cut-off-Wert von mehr als 108 mg/dl am 1. postoperativen Tag mit einer Odds Ratio von 16,6 (96 %-KI 6,4/42,8; p < 0,001). Patienten, die unter dem Grenzwert lagen, erlitten in 1,1 % der Fälle Komplikationen im Vergleich zu Patienten, die über dem ermittelten Grenzwert lagen mit 16,8 % (p < 0,001). Ein postoperativer CRP-Anstieg per se ist nicht als Kontraindikation für eine Entlassung anzusehen. Die Bestimmung des CRP nach Appendektomie kann, insbesondere in Zusammenschau mit der klinischen Präsentation des Patienten, ein effektiver Prädiktor für postoperative Komplikationen sein.

Abstract

Background

Appendectomy is the most frequently performed non-elective surgical procedure in general surgery. Despite the questionable benefit, inflammatory markers, such as leukocyte count and C-related protein (CRP) are often determined before and after the surgical procedure. Clinicians are not infrequently confronted with the question whether a patient can be discharged despite an increase in inflammatory laboratory parameters.

Objectives

The aim of the current study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical course of patients after appendectomy and the correlation with inflammatory laboratory findings.

Material and methods

A total of 969 patients underwent a surgical procedure due to clinically suspected acute appendicitis. All clinical, laboratory and histopathological data were obtained from the patient records and a quality control database. Laboratory results were correlated with clinical and histopathological data (e.g. t-test, χ 2-test, regression analysis and ROC curves).

Results

In patients without acute appendicitis operative trauma caused an increase in CRP up to a median of 31 mg/dl on the first postoperative day and up to 47 mg/dl on postoperative day 2. The overall morbidity was 6.2 %. The strongest predictive parameter for complications was a CRP of more than 108 mg/l on the first postoperative day with an odds ratio of 16.6 (96 % CI 6.4/42.8, p < 0.001, specificity 88 % and sensitivity 69 %). Patients with CRP values below the threshold suffered from complications in 1.1 % of cases in contrast to patients above the threshold in 16.8 % of cases (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

A moderate postoperative elevation of CRP values is not a general contraindication for discharge; however, postoperative determination of CRP serum values after appendectomy might be an effective predictor for complications and should therefore be measured in the clinical routine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Literatur

  1. Allemann P, Probst H, Demartines N et al (2011) Prevention of infectious complications after laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated acute appendicitis – the role of routine abdominal drainage. Langenbecks Arch Surg 396:63–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Amalesh T, Shankar M, Shankar R (2004) CRP in acute appendicitis – is it a necessary investigation? Int J Surg 2:88–89

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barkhausen S, Wullstein C, Gross E (1998) Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy – a comparison with reference to early postoperative complications. Zentrabl Chir 123:858–862

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker H, Neufang T (1997) Appendectomy 1997 – open or closed? Chirurg 68:17–29

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Davies GM, Dasbach EJ, Teutsch S (2004) The burden of appendicitis-related hospitalizations in the United States in 1997. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 5:160–165

    Google Scholar 

  6. Guller U, Hervey S, Purves H et al (2004) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes comparison based on a large administrative database. Ann Surg 239:43–52

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Horstmann R, Tiwisina C, Classen C et al (2005) Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: which factors influence the decision between the surgical techniques? Zentrabl Chir 130:48–54

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Izbicki JR, Knoefel WT, Wilker DK et al (1992) Accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a retrospective and prospective analysis of 686 patients. Eur J Surg 158:227–231

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jangjoo A, Varasteh AR, Bahar MM et al (2011) Is C-reactive protein helpful for early diagnosis of acute appendicitis? Acta Chir Belg 111:219–222

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Janicki K, Bicki J, Radzikowska E et al (2001) C-reactive protein (CRP) as a response to postoperative stress in laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the abdominal wall lift, with performed pneumoperitoneum (CO2), and in open cholecystectomy. Ann Univ Mariae Curie Sklodowska Med 56:397–402

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Katsuno G, Nagakari K, Yoshikawa S et al (2009) Laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: a comparison with open appendectomy. World J Surg 33:208–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaya B, Sana B, Eris C et al (2012) The diagnostic value of D-dimer, procalcitonin and CRP in acute appendicitis. Int J Med Sci 9:909–915

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim E, Subhas G, Mittal VK et al (2009) C-reactive protein estimation does not improve accuracy in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pediatric patients. Int J Surg 7:74–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kockerling F, Schug-Pass C, Grund S (2009) Laparoscopic appendectomy. The new standard? Chirurg 80:594–601

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Li P, Xu Q, Ji Z et al (2005) Comparison of surgical stress between laparoscopic and open appendectomy in children. J Pediatr Surg 40:1279–1283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Li X, Zhang J, Sang L et al (2010) Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy – a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Gastroenterol 10:129

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Lippert H, Koch A, Marusch F et al (2002) Open vs. laparoscopic appendectomy. Chirurg 73:791–798

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Luo K, Li JS, Li LT et al (2003) Operative stress response and energy metabolism after laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to open surgery. World J Gastroenterol 9:847–850

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ng S, Fleming FJ, Drumm J et al (2008) Current trends in the management of acute appendicitis. Ir J Med Sci 177:121–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ortega-Deballon P, Ruiz De Adana-Belbel JC, Hernandez-Matias A et al (2008) Usefulness of laboratory data in the management of right iliac fossa pain in adults. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1093–1099

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA (2010) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD001546

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sengupta A, Bax G, Paterson-Brown S (2009) White cell count and C-reactive protein measurement in patients with possible appendicitis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:113–115

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Treutner KH, Schumpelick V (1997) Epidemiology of appendicitis. Chirurg 68:1–5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsioplis C, Brockschmidt C, Sander S et al (2013) Factors influencing the course of acute appendicitis in adults and children. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398:857–867

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Xharra S, Gashi-Luci L, Xharra K et al (2012) Correlation of serum C-reactive protein, white blood count and neutrophil percentage with histopathology findings in acute appendicitis. World J Emerg Surg 7:27

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Yu CW, Juan LI, Wu MH et al (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and white blood cell count for suspected acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 100:322–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zielke A, Sitter H, Rampp T et al (2001) Clinical decision-making, ultrasonography, and scores for evaluation of suspected acute appendicitis. World J Surg 25:578–584

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. M. Tachezy, I. Anusic, S. Rothenhöfer, F. Gebauer, J.R. Izbicki und M. Bockhorn geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Tachezy.

Additional information

Die Autoren M. Tachezy und I. Anusic haben zu gleichen Teilen zu der Arbeit beigetragen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tachezy, M., Anusic, I., Rothenhöfer, S. et al. Perioperative CRP-Bestimmung bei der Appendektomie. Chirurg 86, 881–888 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-014-2913-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-014-2913-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation