Role of limited caecal resection in patients with acute gangrenous appendicitis


  • Jignesh A. Gandhi Department of General Surgery, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India
  • Pravin H. Shinde Department of General Surgery, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital,Mumbai,India
  • Rohan D. Digarse Department of General Surgery, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital,Mumbai,India



Acute Gangrenous appendicitis, Base perforation, Limited caecal resection, Faecal fistula


Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common acute surgical condition of the abdomen. Diagnosis is made based on full clinical history and examination, blood investigations and imaging. Delay in diagnosis and treatment leads to its perforation. Perforated appendicitis is associated with higher mortality rate (5%). For perforated appendicitis, especially in long duration of the disease, the standard technique of the appendectomy may not be sufficient for prevention of subsequent complications (i.e. intestinal fistulae, peritonitis, intra-abdominal abscesses, and acute intestinal obstruction).

Methods: This retrospective non-randomised study was carried out in KEM hospital, Mumbai, India from 2010 to 2016. It involved 23 patients (diagnosed as acute appendicitis) who underwent limited caecal resection for the appendicular pathology where the appendicular tissue was not suitable for the placement of appendiceal ligature or caecal purse-string suture.

Results: Out of 23 patients undergoing limited caecal resection in our setup, only 1 patient (4.35%) developed a faecal fistula which was managed conservatively with application of sterile dressing daily, which healed over time.

Conclusions: This retrospective study demonstrates that the technique of limited caecal resection for appendicular base pathology (perforation and gangrene) seems a viable option in advanced cases of perforated appendix and is also helpful in reducing the chances of development of post-operative faecal fistula.


Charles Mc EH. Burney- Early operative treatment of acute appendicitis. Surgery. 1992;10:112.

Brennan SS. Management of the perforated appendix a controlled clinical trial. Br J Surg. 1982;69:510.

Schumpelick V, Dreuw B, Ophoff K, Prescheer A. Embryology, anatomy and surgical application. Surg Clin North Am. 2000;80:295-318.

Kovalicik PJ, Simstein NL, Gross GH. Ileocecal masses discovered unexpectedly at surgery for appendicitis. Am Surg. 1978;44(5):279-81.

Poole GV. Management of the difficult appendiceal stump: how I do it. Am Surg. 1993;59(9):624-5.

Thompson JE, Jr, Bennion RS, Schmit PJ, Hiyama DT. Cecectomy for complicated appendicitis. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;179(2):135-8.

Poon RT, Chu KW. Inflammatory cecal masses in patients presenting with appendicitis. World J Surg. 1992;23(7):713-6.

Lane JS, Schimt PJ, Chandler CF. Ileocecectomy is definitive treatment for advanced appendicitis. Am Surg. 2001;67(12):1117-22.

Guven H, Koc B, Saglam F, Bayram IA, Adas G. Emergency right hemicolectomy for inflammatory cecal masses mimicking acute appendicitis. World J Emerg Surg. 2014;9(1):7.

Colson M, Skinner Ka, Dunnington. High negative appendicectomy rates are no longer acceptable. Am J Surg. 1997;174(6):723.

Akber GA, Khaskheli NM, Aijaz Ahmed. Perforated vs. Non-perforated appendicitis- a comparative study. JCP SP. 1996;6(4):214.

Rashid KA. Perforated Appendicitis vs non-perforated appendicitis. JAMA. 1987;19:325-6.

Ahmed I. A critical evaluation of acute appendicitis. Specialist Pak J Med Sci. 1993;9:112.

Thomas CJ, Muenchow SK. Treatment of complicated Appendicitis. J Paed Surg. 1993;29:204.

Ali N, Javid A. The role of tube caecostomy in preventing post-appendicectomy abscesses and fistula formation. Pak J Med Sci. 2005;21:285-8.

Royster HA. Appendicitis. New York: D. Appleton and co; 1927:346.






Original Research Articles