![]() ![]() ![]() īoueil A, Guegan H, Colot J, D’Ortenzio E, Guerrier G (2015) Peritoneal fluid culture and antibiotic treatment in patients with perforated appendicitis in a Pacific Island. Obinwa O, Casidy M, Flynn J (2014) The microbiology of bacterial peritonitis due to appendicitis in children. Mosdell DM, Morris DM, Fry DE (1994) Peritoneal cultures and antibiotic therapy in pediatric perforated appendicitis. J Pediatr Surg 56:1145–1149īaron E, Bennion R, Thompson J, Strong C, Summanen P, McTeague M et al (1992) A microbiological comparison between acute and complicated appendicitis. Kwok CPD, Tsui SYB, Chan KWE (2021) Updates on bacterial resistance and empirical antibiotics treatment of complicated acute appendicitis in children. Guillet-Caruba C, Cheikhelard A, Guillet M, Bille E, Descamps P, Yin L et al (2011) Bacteriologic epidemiology and empirical treatment of pediatric complicated appendicitis. (76)90167-6ĭavid IB, Buck JR, Filler RM (1982) Rational use of antibiotics for perforated appendicitis in childhood. Harlan SH (1976) Bacterial flora of appendicitis in children. Arch Surg-Chicago 136:438–441Įmil S, Elkady S, Shbat L, Youssef F, Baird R, Laberge JM et al (2014) Determinants of postoperative abscess occurrence and percutaneous drainage in children with perforated appendicitis. Krisher SL, Browne A, Dibbins A, Tkacz N, Curci M (2001) Intra-abdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. Wil.lis ZI, Duggan EM, Bucher BT, Pietsch JB, Milovancev M, Wharton W, et al (2016) Effect of a clinical practice guideline for pediatric complicated appendicitis. Slusher J, Bates CA, Johnson C, Williams C, Dasgupta R, von Allmen D (2014) Standardization and improvement of care for pediatric patients with perforated appendicitis. Russell WS, Schuh AM, Hill JG, Hebra A, Cina RA, Smith CD et al (2013) Clinical practice guidelines for pediatric appendicitis evaluation can decrease computed tomography utilization while maintaining diagnostic accuracy. Stringer MD (2017) Acute appendicitis J Paediatr Child H 53:1071–1076 In: Holcomb WG, Murphy JP, Ostlie JD (eds) Ashcraft’s Pediatric Surgery, 6th edn. The abundance of these bacteria might explain why non-empiric cephalosporins are not effective in perforated appendicitis and the superiority of penicillin-based empiric antibiotics. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus anginosus group, and Enterococcus group have better susceptibility to penicillin-based empiric antibiotics than cephalosporins. ![]() However, the total proportions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus anginosus group, and Enterococcus group were significantly higher in perforated appendicitis than in non-perforated appendicitis. Escherichia coli and Bacteroides species were the dominant bacteria in both conditions. ResultsĪ total of 608 and 72 cases of non-perforated and perforated appendicitis were included. The duration of symptoms before surgery, pre-surgical white blood cell count, C-reactive protein value, postsurgical length of stay, length of antibiotic treatment, and the rate of using second-line antibiotics or complications were also compared. MethodsĪscites culture results in perforated and non-perforated appendicitis cases were analyzed using a departmental database. ![]() To investigate this issue, this study aimed to compare bacterial floras in ascites culture between perforated and non-perforated appendicitis. However, monotherapy with such antibiotics is mostly insufficient for perforated appendicitis. Escherichia coli and Bacteroides species are the most frequently detected species in ascites in perforated appendicitis and are generally sensitive to non-empiric cephalosporins like cefazolin or cefmetazole. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |