Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “APPENDECTOMY”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
PubMed1993

Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to prospectively define the impact of laparoscopy on the management of patients with a presumed diagnosis of appendicitis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: While the role of laparoscopy in the management of cholelithiasis is well established, its impact on the management of acute appendicitis needs to be objectively defined and compared to that of conventional management. Several authors have predicted that laparoscopic appendectomy will become the preferred treatment for appendicitis. METHODS: Two groups of consecutive patients with similar clinical characteristics of acute appendicitis were compared. Data on the laparoscopic group were compiled prospectively on standardized forms; data on the conventional group were collected retrospectively. Operative time, hospital stay, analgesia, cost, and return to normal activities were noted. RESULTS: Seventeen consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy were compared to 18 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopy (16 of these 18 had laparoscopic appendectomy). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinical characteristics and appendiceal histopathology. The mean operative times were 61 +/- 4.1 minutes and 46 +/- 2.9 minutes for the laparoscopy and conventional groups, respectively (p < 0.01). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic appendectomy group, with 81% of patients being discharged on their first postoperative day (p < 0.001). The laparoscopic appendectomy patients required significantly less narcotic analgesia (p < 0.02). Return to normal activity was not significantly different between the two groups. The average total cost of laparoscopic appendectomy was 30% greater than that of conventional appendectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy is a useful adjunct to the management of patients with a presumed clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2001

Prevalence of appendectomy among ulcerative colitis patients and their relatives.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that appendectomy may protect against ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the incidences of appendectomy and UC in developed countries have diverged over the last 50 years, possibly as a consequence of environmental factors. AIM: To determine whether the incidence of appendectomy is lower in patients with UC than in the general population. METHODS: Patients with UC (153), their relatives (116) and members of the general population (306) that had been matched for age, sex and educational status were studied. RESULTS: Six per cent of UC patients had undergone appendectomy. The corresponding figure for non-family controls was 20% (P < 0.0001; OR = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.15-0.45). The rate of appendectomy within families (cases plus siblings) was 17/269 (6.3%) and was similar to that for UC patients alone(P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A negative association between appendectomy and UC exists in our patients with UC. In addition, the appendectomy rate in families of UC patients was lower than that in the general population, possibly implying that common environmental and genetic factors could play an important role in the divergent incidences of appendicitis and UC over the last 50 years.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Appendectomy is more frequent but not a risk factor in Crohn's disease while being protective in ulcerative colitis: a comparison of surgical procedures in inflammatory bowel disease.

OBJECTIVE: Appendectomy was shown to be protective in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). There are fewer data in Crohn's disease (CD). Other operations were less studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and tonsillectomy, including their timing, in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in comparison to controls. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-one patients with UC and 260 with CD, 475 clinic controls, and 428 community controls were interviewed. RESULTS: Appendectomy was found in 5.5% patients with UC, in 11% of clinic controls (p < 0.05), and 7.7% of community controls (p = not significant). The differences were more significant for appendectomy before onset of disease. Appendectomy was performed in 19.2% of patients with CD, in 10.9% of clinic controls, and in 10.1% of community controls (p < 0.01). However, there were no significant differences when only appendectomy before onset of disease was considered. Cholecystectomy was found in 1.5% of patients with UC, in 6.1% of clinic controls (p < 0.01), and in 4.5% of community controls (p = not significant). The difference remained significant when confined to operations performed before disease onset. No such difference was found in patients with CD. No significant difference was found in the prevalence of tonsillectomy between patients and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Appendectomy is protective in UC; it is more frequent, but not a risk factor in CD. The role of cholecystectomy should be investigated further.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Late abdominal complaints after appendectomy--readmissions during long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The postoperative risk of small bowel obstruction is a recognized complication following appendectomy. Few studies have reconsidered the whole extent of abdominal complaints and problems following appendectomy. This study tries to evaluate the long-term outcome describing abdominal complaints requiring readmission following appendectomy. METHODS: A retrospective study of 3,230 patients undergoing open appendectomy at a single center university hospital in Sweden between 1981 and 1996. Late (>30 days) readmissions were noted and the cause for readmission and need for surgical intervention were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, late readmissions occurred in 2.94% during a median follow-up of 10 years after appendectomy. Females predominated among those readmitted, as did patients with complicated appendicitis or a 'normal' appendix. Nonspecific abdominal pain with no sign of small bowel obstruction caused almost half of the readmissions (45%). To a large extent this group consisted of females (76%). Small bowel obstruction was seen in 1.24% and was surgically treated in 0.68% of all appendectomies. Incisional hernias were also seen (0.4% of all appendectomies). CONCLUSION: The magnitude of readmissions due to abdominal complaints is more pronounced than previously reported with as many patients with signs of small bowel obstruction managed nonoperatively as surgically, and frequent readmissions due to nonspecific abdominal pain.

Abdominal Pain↗
PubMed2001

Mini-laparoscopic versus laparoscopic approach to appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this clinical study is to evaluate the feasibility of using 2-mm laparoscopic instruments to perform an appendectomy in patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis and compare the outcome of this mini-laparoscopic or "needlescopic" approach to the conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. METHODS: Two groups of patients undergoing appendectomy over 24 months were studied. In the first group, needlescopic appendectomy was performed in 15 patients by surgeons specializing in advanced laparoscopy. These patients were compared with the second or control group that included 21 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. We compared the patients' demographic data, operative findings, complications, postoperative pain medicine requirements, length of hospital stay, and recovery variables. Differences were considered statistically significant at a p-value < 0.05. RESULTS: Patient demographics, history of previous abdominal surgery, and operative findings were similar in both groups. There was no conversion to open appendectomy in either group. No postoperative morbidity or mortality occurred in either group. The needlescopic group had a significantly shorter mean operative time (p = 0.02), reduced postoperative narcotics requirements (p = 0.05), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.04), and quicker return to work (p = 0.03) when compared with the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the needlescopic technique is a safe and effective approach to appendectomy. When performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, the needlescopic technique results in significantly shorter postoperative convalescence and a prompt recovery.

Adult↗
PubMed1987

Incidence and costs of incidental appendectomy as a preventive measure.

Statewide hospital discharge data in South Carolina for the period 1979-81 were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the incidental appendectomy performed as a preventive measure. The occurrence of incidental appendectomy exceeded that of appendicitis treated by appendectomy, with population-based rates of 1.13/1,000 and 0.97/1,000 person-years, respectively. Over 64 per cent of appendicitis cases occurred in persons under 25 years of age while 74 per cent of incidental appendectomies occurred in persons age 25 and over. Extrapolating to the nation, the data suggest that 254,250 incidental appendectomies might prevent 3,382 future cases of hospitalized appendicitis. The cost of the prevented cases is estimated as $6,764,000. The cost of the incidental appendectomies would be $20,340,000 if as many as 10 per cent of surgeons' fees were separately charged and twice as much if twice as many were so charged. Information on charges for incidental appendectomies is not readily available.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Laparoscope-assisted appendectomy in adults: the two-trocar technique.

BACKGROUND: Open appendectomy is still the most common method of treating appendicitis. Laparoscopic procedures for removal of the appendix by the "in" technique as an alternative to conventional appendectomy have gained wide popularity, but have been criticized for their technical difficulty and high cost. We assessed the safety and efficacy of the laparoscope-assisted appendectomy (the two-trocar technique) in adults. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 129 patients who had appendectomy using the laparoscope-assisted two-trocar technique between July 2002 to December 2003. The procedures were done by consultants and surgeons-in-training with experience in minimally invasive and open techniques. Locally modified endoloop and reusable trocars were used to reduce the cost. Appendectomy was performed extra-abdominally after the appendix was identified by using a laparoscope through one port and then delivered outside through the second port using reusable laparoscopy instruments. RESULTS: The two-trocar technique was successful in 101 (78.3%) cases; 14 (10.8%) needed a third trocar to complete the operation extra-abdominally, 6 (4.6%) were converted to open surgery, and 5 (3.8%) had an intra-abdominal laparoscopic appendectomy. The mean operation time was 35 minutes (range, 30-90 minutes). Six cases (4.6%) had infection. The mean hospital stay was 2.8 days (range, 2-7 days). No case of port hernia was reported during the follow-up period (range, 14-30 months). CONCLUSION: The laparoscope-assisted two-trocar technique for removal of the appendix can be performed as safely and efficiently as the open technique, but at a lower cost than the complete laparoscopic "in" method and does not need much technical expertise. This method is recommended as an alternative procedure to open appendectomy or the complete laparoscopic "in" technique in adults.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

[The value of C-reactive protein and leucocyte count in preventing negative appendectomies].

This study was designed to determine the values of C-Reactive Protein measurements (an acute phase reactant, CRP) and leucocyte counts in prevention of negative appendectomies. Despite improvements in diagnostic methods, negative appendectomy rates still remain between 10-30% in acute appendicitis. Cost-effective and easily applicable diagnostic methods with prompt results are required to reduce negative appendectomy rates. In this prospective study, one hundred twenty-six patients were operated on for initial diagnosis of acute appendicitis between July 1999 and July 2000. CRP and leucocyte count were measured in all cases. The data of the outcomes of clinic and pathological findings were analyzed statistically. Among the 126 study patients, 71 (56.3%) were male and 55 (43.7%) were female. 79 (62.6%) cases had noncomplicated appendicitis, 27 (21.4%) cases had complicated appendicitis and 20 (15.8%) cases had negative appendectomy. The mean CRP level was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in patients with complicated acute appendicitis than in those with noncomplicated acute appendicitis and in those with negative appendectomy. The mean leucocyte count was significantly lower (p < 0.001) in patient with negative appendectomy than in those with noncomplicated appendicitis and in those with complicated appendicitis. Although CRP increases with inflammation, it increases markedly after the occurrence of complication. The increase in leucocyte count is early sign of appendix inflammation. CRP measurements or leucocyte counts are not effective alone to prevent negative appendectomies.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

A prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible, but whether it confers any advantage to patients with acute appendicitis is not known. We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare results of laparoscopic and open appendectomy in patients with signs and symptoms suggesting acute appendicitis who were seen by one surgical team. METHODS: Sixty-two consecutive patients were randomized, 30 to laparoscopy and 32 to a classical open appendectomy. Postoperative recovery, complications, and return to normal activities were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: The laparoscopy group were discharged earlier (2.5 vs 3.8 days, p less than 0.01). Postoperative complications were more frequent after open appendectomy. Follow-up showed less pain, shorter bed stay at home, and faster return to work and sport after laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective randomized study shows that laparoscopic appendectomy is superior to open appendectomy in terms of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and return to normal activities and is recommended as the approach of choice in the management of acute appendicitis.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

[Appendicitis and appendectomy in Norway 1990-2001].

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of appendicitis and appendectomy in Norway from 1990 to 2001. METHODS: Data were compiled from the Norwegian Patient Registry based on ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes for appendicitis and appendectomy. Re-admissions after appendectomy were selected based on institution and allocation numbers for hospitalisation. RESULTS: Age-adjusted incidence rates for appendectomy were 117 per 100 000 for men and 116 per 100 000 for women. Incidence rates were highest among patients aged 10-29. Diagnostic accuracy increased from 81% to 86% in men and from 60% to 71% in women over the study period. Perforation ratio increased from 12% to 21% in men and from 9% to 17% in women. Appendectomy by laparoscopic technique increased during 1998 to 2001 from 5% to 10% of cases for men and from 9% to 15% of cases for women. The proportion of laparoscopic appendectomy was considerably higher in two counties (50% and 28% in 2000-2001). Length of hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopy (median two days) than after open surgery (median three days), with no difference in the rate of re-admission of 4%. INTERPRETATION: Diagnostic accuracy and perforation ratio increased over the 1990s. Patients operated upon with laparoscopic technique had shorter hospital stays and the same re-admission rate compared to patients undergoing conventional surgery. Though the proportion of appendectomies done by laparoscopy doubled from 1998 to 2001, the procedure is not in commonly use in Norway.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Reduced social morbidity of laparoscopic appendectomy in children.

Laparoscopic appendectomy has not been uniformly adopted by pediatric surgeons. Our children's hospital adopted laparoscopic appendectomy due to perceived benefits to patients and their families. We hypothesized that laparoscopic appendectomy in children resulted in less social morbidity than those undergoing open appendectomy. A questionnaire focused on a set of postoperative variables affecting the patient's and the family's return to normal activities. Families expressed their answers as a range of days. Five different ranges were assigned a numerical value for 10 different social morbidity variables. The numerical values were analyzed using Pearson chi2 test; statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. The response rate was 55 per cent (134 of 244). Seventy-four had open and 47 laparoscopic appendectomy with a comparable incidence of acute and perforated appendicitis. Children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy had shorter hospital stays and earlier resumption of feeding, return to school, return to pain-free walking and stair climbing, and resumption of normal activities including gym. Additionally, they had fewer wound problems, shorter duration of oral pain medication usage, and their parents returned to work quicker than the open group. All these were statistically significant. Laparoscopic appendectomy results in significantly reduced social morbidity for children and their families.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed2005

Laparoscopic appendectomy: a series of cases utilizing laparosonic coagulating shears as compared to endo-GIA and endoshears.

OBJECTIVE: To report a series of laparoscopic appendectomies utilizing laparosonic coagulating shears (LCS) (harmonic scalpel). STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at Walter Reed Army Medical Center between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2001. Procedures were included if only 1 instrument was utilized for transection of the appendix: endoshears, endo-GIA (Tyco U.S. Surgical, Norwalk, Connecticut) or LCS. Procedures on ruptured appendixes and emergency procedures were excluded. Outcome variables of interest included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay and complications. RESULTS: Mean estimated blood loss, mean operative times and hospital stay were consistent with those of other techniques of laparoscopic appendectomy. LCS was used more frequently for appendectomy performed at the time of another procedure than were endo-GIA and endoshears. There were no complications in the harmonic scalpel laparoscopic appendectomy series. CONCLUSION: This series demonstrates that laparoscopic appendectomy with LCS has low morbidity and is as efficacious as other methods of laparoscopic appendectomy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Negative appendectomy rate: influence of CT scans.

Negative appendectomy rate varies significantly depending on patient age and sex. However, the impact of computed tomography (CT) scans on the diagnosis of appendicitis is unknown. The goal of this study was to examine the negative appendectomy rate using a statewide database and analyze the association of receipt of CT scan. Using the California Inpatient File, all patients undergoing appendectomy in 1999-2000 were identified (n = 75,452). Demographic and clinical data were analyzed, including procedure approach (open vs laparoscopic) and appendicitis type (negative, simple, abscess, peritonitis). Patients with CT scans performed were identified to compare the negative appendectomy rate. For the entire cohort, appendicitis type was 59 per cent simple, 10 per cent with abscess, 18.7 per cent with peritonitis, and 9.3 per cent negative. Males had a lower rate of negative appendicitis than females (6.0% vs 13.4%, P < 0.0001). The use of CT scans was associated with an overall lower negative appendectomy rate for females, especially in the < 5 years and > 45 years age categories. Use of CT scans in males does not appear to be efficacious, as the negative appendectomy rates were similar across all age categories. In conclusion, use of CT was associated with lower rate of negative appendectomy, depending on patient age and sex.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1980

Incidental appendectomy in the elderly? No.

This study examines the appropriateness of incidental appendectomy in the elderly. By examining the incidences of appendicitis and incidental appendectomy in 1977 in Wisconsin's elderly, this study calculated the chances that a citizen undergoing incidental appendectomy would have required otherwise an operation for appendicitis in his remaining lifetime. The 1977 incidences of appendicitis procedures and incidental appendectomy in citizens greater than or equal to 65 years were 0.78 and 1.59 per 1,000 population at risk. During 1977, 3.73 persons were spared an appendicitis operation in their remaining lifetimes because 3.82 incidental procedures were performed. This represents over 100 incidental procedures to avoid a single case of appendicitis. At a 1977-78 mortality rate of 3.5% for appendicitis in patients greater than or equal to 65 years, nearly 3,000 incidental procedures must be performed to save a life which would be lost to appendicitis otherwise. We doubt that incidental appendectomy in the elderly can be performed to better this threshold of risk. Therefore, we believe that incidental appendectomy is not indicated in the elderly, since it would appear that the risk of incidental appendectomy would outweigh its potential benefits.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

[Does laparoscopy increase the bacteriological risk of appendectomy? Results of a randomized prospective study].

OBJECTIVE: The authors compare the risk of bacteraemia in open and laparoscopic appendectomy in a prospective randomized study. METHODS: 35 patients with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized to have conventional open or laparoscopic surgical procedures. Before randomization, patients signed a consent form to participate in the study. Patients who were converted from laparoscopic to open appendectomy (3 cases), HIV+, allergic to Augmentin or who had contraindications to laparoscopic surgery were excluded from the study. A total of 32 patients were randomized: 17 to open (group I) and 15 to laparoscopic surgery (group II). There were no significant differences with regard to age, ASA score, symptoms or macroscopic aspect of the appendix. Two patients had a normal appendix, 12 had acute appendicitis, 14 gangrenous appendicitis and 4 ruptured or abscessed appendicitis. All patients received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (Augmentin) after blood cultures (H1) were drawn. Five other blood cultures were performed in standard medium and medium neutralizing Augmentin: at the time of opening the peritoneum (H2), after appendectomy (H3), after closure of the abdomen (H4), and at 6 (H5) and 12 hours (H6) after the operation. Bacterial cultures from the appendix site were performed before (P1) and after (P2) appendectomy. RESULTS: The operative mortality rate after conventional or laparoscopic appendectomy was nil. The incidence of post-operative morbidity was 4 cases in group I and 2 cases in group II. No positive bacterial culture was obtained in 17 patients. The distribution of these patients was similar in groups I and II. Samples P1 and P2 were positive in 5 cases. Nine of 27 cases with negative P1 became positive in P2 (33%). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the appearance of the appendix. Only two patients had positive blood cultures at H1. One of them had blood cultures at H3, H4 positive for a second germ. CONCLUSION: A low risk of bacteraemia exists for both open and laparoscopic appendectomy. This risk did not appear to increase for laparoscopy. Conventional and laparoscopic surgical procedures led to positive peritoneal bacterial cultures after appendectomy in 33% of cases.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Appendectomy is an independent protective factor for ulcerative colitis: results of a multicentre case control study. The Italian Group for the Study of the Colon and Rectum (GISC)

BACKGROUND: Different exogenous factors are believed to play a role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis. Smoking habits and other risk factors have received much attention. It has recently been reported that appendectomy decreases the risk of ulcerative colitis. AIM: Aim of the study was to further examine the role of appendectomy in ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A large multicentre case control study was performed. Cases were all patients with a recent new diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (from 1990 to 1994) at participating centres. One or two controls attending the orthopaedic and surgical units were considered and matched to cases for age (+/- 5 years), sex and year of diagnosis. A total of 536 cases and 755 controls were enrolled. Mean age of cases was 37.9 years (range 2-92). Assessment of exposure was done by examining the clinical records and by interview, if necessary. Smoking habits, alcohol consumption, use of oral contraceptives, type of occupation and area of residence were also recorded. Odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculated by conditional logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Forty-one out of the 536 cases (7.6%) and 150 out of the 755 controls (19.9%) had been submitted to appendectomy. A total of 110 out of 536 cases (20.5%) and 135 out of 753 (17.9%) controls had had tonsillectomy. Seven out of 41 cases and 15 out of 755 controls underwent appendectomy for recurrent pain. In all ulcerative colitis patients, appendectomy had been performed before the onset of disease. When data were adjusted for the confounding variables, ulcerative colitis patients were less likely to have had appendectomy compared with controls (odds ratio = 0.3, confidence interval = 0.19-0.48). There was no significant association of ulcerative colitis with tonsillectomy (odds ratio = 1.09, confidence interval = 0.76-1.58). The well recognized inverse association of ulcerative colitis with cigarette smoking was also shown in this study. CONCLUSIONS: The present data emerging from a large multicentre study, confirm that appendectomy has a protective role for the development of ulcerative colitis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Effects of delaying appendectomy for acute appendicitis for 12 to 24 hours.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether delaying appendectomy for 12 hours to avoid disturbing the operating room schedule and to minimize the number of operations during the night negatively affects the outcome of patients with acute appendicitis. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Large teaching community hospital. PATIENTS: The medical records of 380 patients who underwent appendectomies between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2004, were reviewed. Patients proven to have an inflamed appendix on the pathological report were divided into 2 groups. The early group comprised patients who had undergone appendectomies within 12 hours of presentation to the emergency department, including patients with generalized sepsis. The late group comprised patients who had undergone appendectomies more than 12 to 24 hours after presentation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay, operative time, and the rate of perforations and complications. INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic or open appendectomies. RESULTS: There were 309 patients included in our study. There were no statistically significant differences between the early and late groups in the length of stay, operative time, the percentage of advanced appendicitis, or the rate of complications. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, delaying appendectomies for acute appendicitis for 12 to 24 hours after presentation does not significantly increase the rate of perforations, operative time, or length of stay. It decreases the use of the nursing staff, anesthesia team, and surgical house staff during the night shifts, and it decreases the interruption of the regular operating room schedule.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1999

Protective effect of appendectomy on the development of ulcerative colitis: matched, case-control study.

PURPOSE: Appendectomy and cigarette smoking have been suggested to reduce the chance of developing ulcerative colitis. A case-control study was undertaken to determine the relative incidence of appendectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This case-control study examined the incidence of appendectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis and patients attending an orthopedic outpatient clinic. RESULTS: Of 100 patients with ulcerative colitis, 75 pairs were matched for age, gender, and cigarette smoking. The ulcerative colitis group had an appendectomy rate of 8 percent (6/75), compared with 21 percent in the control group (P = 0.018). The odds ratio was 3.5 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.15-10.6). CONCLUSIONS: No previous study has examined the effect of appendectomy, controlling for cigarette smoking. This study confirms that appendectomy protects against or reduces the chance of development of ulcerative colitis. A possible immunological explanation for this effect is advanced.

Adolescent↗