There are insufficient data from Saudi Arabia regarding appendectomy outcomes and hospital length of stay. Further, there is a need to compare the length of stay of Saudi patients and the literature. The purpose is to evaluate the surgical outcomes and hospital length of stay for complicated appendicitis and simple appendicitis. This is a single-center retrospective review of patients who had undergone an appendectomy between 2016 and 2018. The patients were divided into 2 groups: complicated appendicitis versus simple appendicitis. Of 449 patients who underwent appendectomy, 60 (13.4%) had complicated appendicitis. The complicated appendicitis was significantly associated with increased age, pain duration, neutrophilia, high C-reactive protein, fecalith presence, and free fluid. The incidence rate of surgical site infection was 5.8% (identified in 26 patients). Compared to simple appendicitis, complicated appendicitis was associated more with wound infection (1.8% vs 10%, respectively, P = .001), postoperative collection (1.2% vs 11.6%, respectively, P = .001), and readmission within 30 days (2.3% vs 13.4%, respectively, P = .001). By multivariate analysis, factors associated more with increased hospitalization were pain duration (hazard ratio = 2.37, 95% confidence interval = 1.09–5.16, P = .029), operative time (hazard ratio = 2.09, 95% confidence interval = 1.04–4.21, P = .038), and complicated appendicitis (hazard ratio = 6.61, 95% confidence interval = 2.67–14.21, P = .001). Complicated appendicitis correlates with significant morbidity, readmission rate, and 6 times more hospital LOS than simple appendicitis. This review might help in appreciating the burden of complicated appendicitis on hospital length of stay, which needs allocating patients and planning the discharge day for hospitals with limited beds.

Abdulrahman Muaod Alotaibi. Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg -0001;0:. https://doi.org/10.14701/ahbps.22-067

Introduction: Gender discrimination continues to be an issue in different surgical subspecialties, especially in Saudi Arabia, where no studies have been conducted so far on female surgeons in academia, on gender discrimination, and on job satisfaction. Considering the increasing number of women enrolling for surgery programs in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, this study aims to examine their perceptions about and equity in working as surgeons. Methods: Following the STROCSS criteria, cross-sectional analyses were conducted of survey data from a multicentric online questionnaire in 2019/2020. A representative sample of medical interns and surgeons (n = 100) from Saudi Arabia responded out of 400 from the 4th iteration. Results: Females were 53%; most participants were less than 40 years. Women ranked assistant professors were fewer than men (2% vs. 11%). The number of publications by females vs. males was 2.58 +/- 2.68 vs. 11.37 +/- 20.53 (p = 0.002). Surgery was not considered a profession conducive to family life according to more than half the women citing lack of flexible/part-time training or work (26/53, or 49%). However, only 1/5, or 9/47 (19.1%), of men thought there was gender attitude/bias; men also had more variety in surgical career choices. Further, most patients preferred male surgeons ( p = 0.026). Both females (30/53 or 56.6%) and males (25/47 or 53.2%) agreed that the best response to an offensive question was to ignore it. Decision in choosing their specialty was influenced mostly by career and promotion prospects, enthusiasm, and commitment (females: 31/53 or 58.5% and males: 17/47 or 36.2%) with p = 0.026. Conclusions: The findings reveal the persisting discrepancies based on gender in the surgical field in Saudi Arabia. A nationwide movement limiting working hours, encouraging medical students to enter surgery, and upholding women in leadership positions can help in overcoming this situation.