The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Antibiotic Therapy vs Appendectomy for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The APPAC Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: An increasing amount of evidence supports the use of antibiotics instead of surgery for treating patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. OBJECTIVE: To compare antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by computed tomography (CT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Appendicitis Acuta (APPAC) multicenter, open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 2009 until June 2012 in Finland. The trial enrolled 530 patients aged 18 to 60 years with uncomplicated acute appendicitis confirmed by a CT scan. Patients were randomly assigned to early appendectomy or antibiotic treatment with a 1-year follow-up period. INTERVENTIONS: Patients randomized to antibiotic therapy received intravenous ertapenem (1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin (500 mg once daily) and metronidazole (500 mg 3 times per day). Patients randomized to the surgical treatment group were assigned to undergo standard open appendectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point for the surgical intervention was the successful completion of an appendectomy. The primary end point for antibiotic-treated patients was discharge from the hospital without the need for surgery and no recurrent appendicitis during a 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS: There were 273 patients in the surgical group and 257 in the antibiotic group. Of 273 patients in the surgical group, all but 1 underwent successful appendectomy, resulting in a success rate of 99.6% (95% CI, 98.0% to 100.0%). In the antibiotic group, 70 patients (27.3%; 95% CI, 22.0% to 33.2%) underwent appendectomy within 1 year of initial presentation for appendicitis. Of the 256 patients available for follow-up in the antibiotic group, 186 (72.7%; 95% CI, 66.8% to 78.0%) did not require surgery. The intention-to-treat analysis yielded a difference in treatment efficacy between groups of -27.0% (95% CI, -31.6% to ∞) (P = .89). Given the prespecified noninferiority margin of 24%, we were unable to demonstrate noninferiority of antibiotic treatment relative to surgery. Of the 70 patients randomized to antibiotic treatment who subsequently underwent appendectomy, 58 (82.9%; 95% CI, 72.0% to 90.8%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, 7 (10.0%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 19.5%) had complicated acute appendicitis, and 5 (7.1%; 95% CI, 2.4% to 15.9%) did not have appendicitis but received appendectomy for suspected recurrence. There were no intra-abdominal abscesses or other major complications associated with delayed appendectomy in patients randomized to antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with CT-proven, uncomplicated appendicitis, antibiotic treatment did not meet the prespecified criterion for noninferiority compared with appendectomy. Most patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis did not require appendectomy during the 1-year follow-up period, and those who required appendectomy did not experience significant complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01022567.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines
Di Saverio, S., Podda, M., De Simone, B., Ceresoli, M., Augustin, G., Gori, A., Boermeester, M., Sartelli, M., Coccolini, F., Tarasconi, A., et al. (2020) · World Journal of Emergency Surgery · doi:10.1186/s13017-020-00306-3 · Cited by 1,446
WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections
Sartelli, M., Coccolini, F., Kluger, Y., Agastra, E., Abu-Zidan, F. M., Abbas, A. E. S., Ansaloni, L., Adesunkanmi, A. K., Atanasov, B., Augustin, G., et al. (2021) · World Journal of Emergency Surgery · doi:10.1186/s13017-021-00387-8 · Cited by 207
Source control in emergency general surgery: WSES, GAIS, SIS-E, SIS-A guidelines
Coccolini, F., Sartelli, M., Sawyer, R., Rasa, K., Viaggi, B., Abu-Zidan, F., Soreide, K., Hardcastle, T., Gupta, D., Bendinelli, C., et al. (2023) · World Journal of Emergency Surgery · doi:10.1186/s13017-023-00509-4 · Cited by 99
Singh, H., Koomson, A. S., Decker, K. M., Park, J., & Demers, A. A. (2020) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.32793 · Cited by 73
Allocation concealment in randomised controlled trials: are we getting better?: Table 1
Clark, L., Fairhurst, C., & Torgerson, D. J. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i5663 · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Salminen, P., Paajanen, H., Rautio, T., Nordström, P., Aarnio, M., Rantanen, T., Tuominen, R., Hurme, S., Virtanen, J., Mecklin, J.-P., Sand, J., Jartti, A., Rinta-Kiikka, I., & Grönroos, J. M.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2015-06-16
- Volume
- 313
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 2340
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2129212517
- Cited by
- 817
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 69.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antibiotic Therapy vs Appendectomy for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The APPAC Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2015.6154
- The paper
- Salminen, P., Paajanen, H., Rautio, T., Nordström, P., Aarnio, M., Rantanen, T., Tuominen, R., Hurme, S., Virtanen, J., Mecklin, J.-P., Sand, J., Jartti, A., Rinta-Kiikka, I., & Grönroos, J. M. (2015). Antibiotic Therapy vs Appendectomy for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: The APPAC Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.6154
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.