RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Role of type I hypersensitivity reaction in the development of overall and uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.06.11.24308763
DO 10.1101/2024.06.11.24308763
A1 Montero, Javier Arredondo
A1 Jiménez, María Rico
A1 Riveros, Blanca Paola Pérez
A1 Atuan, Rafael Fernández
A1 Pakkasjärvi, Niklas
A1 Krishnan, Nellai
A1 Delgado-Miguel, Carlos
A1 Anand, Sachit
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308763.abstract
AB Background This systematic review aimed to analyze the potential etiopathogenic role of a type I hypersensitivity reaction in the development of overall acute appendicitis (AA), non-complicated acute appendicitis (NCAA), and complicated acute appendicitis (CAA).Methods This review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024516547). We included both prospective and retrospective original clinical studies that examined the role of immunoallergic processes in the development of acute appendicitis (AA). A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and OVID, using the following search terms and keywords: (allergy OR allergic OR immunoallergy OR immunoallergic OR immunomediated) AND (appendicitis OR appendectomy) AND (IgE OR “IgE-mediated” OR hypersensitivity OR “type I”). Two independent reviewers meticulously selected the articles and extracted relevant data. The methodological quality of the studies was rigorously assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa index. A synthesis of the results, a standardization of the metrics, and seven random-effect meta-analyses were performed.Results This review included nineteen studies. A random-effects meta-analysis including six articles (6370 patients with NCAA and 2000 patients with CAA) showed that patients with any documented history of IgE-mediated allergy had a lower risk of developing CAA (OR 0.52, 95%CI [0.38-0.72], p<0.0001). The random-effect meta-analysis for serum Interleukin-9 (NCAA vs. CAA) included two articles (177 patients with NCAA and 101 patients with CAA) and resulted in a significant mean difference [95% CI] of –0.38 [-0.67,-0.08] pg/mL (p=0.01). The random-effect meta-analysis for serum Interleukin-13 (NCAA vs. CAA) included two articles (177 patients with NCAA and 101 patients with CAA) and resulted in a significant mean difference [95% CI] of –11.32 [-13.90,-8.75] pg/mL (p=<0.00001). The random-effect meta-analysis for total eosinophil count (NCAA vs. CAA) included three articles (455 NCAA and 303 CAA) and resulted in a significant mean difference [95% CI] of –0.06 [-0.09,-0.04] eosinophils x 109/L (p=<0.00001).Conclusions The present study demonstrates an association between a type I hypersensitivity reaction and the development of NCAA. Additionally, our meta-analytic model shows significantly higher levels of eosinophils peripheral blood in patients with NCAA than in patients with CAA. These findings suggest a potential immunoallergic mediation in the development of NCAA. Future prospective studies must validate these findings since these patients may benefit from specific therapeutic targets.Funding NoneRegistration PROSPERO (CRD42024516547).Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors