Background. Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) often present with
abdominal pain, usually attributable to vasoocclusion. Experience at
a single institution suggested that appendicitis was a rare cause of a
bdominal symptoms in this population. Objective. We sought to determin
e whether the incidence of appendicitis was significantly lower in pat
ients with SCD than in the population at large. Methods. A 17-year ret
rospective chart review was performed at Rainbow Babies and Children's
Hospital, Cleveland, OH, to determine the approximate incidence of ac
ute appendicitis (AA) in patients with SCD. In addition, we performed
a statistical analysis comparing the incidence of AA among SCD patient
s enrolled in the Cooperative Study of Sickle Cell Disease with that i
n the general population. Results. Only two patients with SCD with pat
hologically confirmed AA were identified among similar to 200 patients
followed at our institution during a 17-year period (similar to 3500
patient-years), yielding an incidence rate of 5.7 cases per 10 000 pat
ient-years. Among 3765 patients with SCD enrolled in the Cooperative S
tudy of Sickle Cell Disease followed for a mean of 5.3 years (19 886 p
atient-years), a maximum of 9 cases of AA were identified, yielding an
incidence rate of 4.5 cases per 10 000 patient-years. Based on data f
rom the National Hospital Discharge Survey of 1978 to 1981, the incide
nce rate of AA in the general population (0 to 44 years of age) is sim
ilar to 16 per 10 000 patient-years. Paired t test analysis demonstrat
ed a highly significant difference (P < .001) when comparing the incid
ence of AA among patients enrolled in the Cooperative Study of Sickle
Cell Disease and the population at large. Conclusion. AA is an unusual
event in patients with SCD. The likelihood of developing appendicitis
in SCD patients is less than one third of that for the population at
large. Conservative therapy is warranted in the large majority of pati
ents with SCD who present with acute abdominal pain. Surgical explorat
ion is best limited to patients with clear evidence of potential surgi
cal pathology or progressive findings during a period of observation.
The biologic basis of our findings remains unknown.