Skip to main content

Retrospective cohort study of the impact of faecoliths on the natural history of acute appendicitis



Despite acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies, its aetiology remains incompletely understood.


This study aimed to assess the rate at which faecoliths were present in acute appendicitis treated with appendicectomy and whether their presence was associated with complicated appendicitis.


All adult patients who underwent appendicectomy for acute appendicitis in a 2 years period (January 2018 and December 2019) at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. The presence of a faecolith was identified by at least one of three methods: pre-operative CT scan, intraoperative identification, or histopathology report. Patients were grouped according to the presence or absence of a faecolith and demographics, type of appendicitis and surgical outcomes analysed. Complicated appendicitis was defined as appendicitis with perforation, gangrene and/or periappendicular abscess formation.


A total of 1035 appendicectomies were performed with acute appendicitis confirmed in 860 (83%), of which 314 (37%) were classified as complicated appendicitis. Three hundred thirty-nine (35%) of the appendicitis cases had faecoliths (complicated 165/314 cases; 53%; uncomplicated 128/546; 23%, p < 0.001). The presence of a faecolith was associated with higher complications and a subsequent longer post-operative stay.


The rigorous methodology of this study has demonstrated a higher rate of faecolith presence in acute appendicitis than previously documented. It reinforces the association of faecoliths with a complicated disease course and the importance in prioritising emergency surgery and postoperative monitoring for complications.


Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency, affecting 17.7 million people annually worldwide. It is most prevalent in the 15–19 years age group [1]. The healthcare burden for acute appendicitis is significant, with a high mean hospital cost and consequential national annual expenditure [2]. Despite its frequency, the aetiology remains incompletely understood [3, 4].

Direct luminal obstruction is thought to be a contributor to the aetiology of acute appendicitis. Multiple studies showed that luminal obstruction-associated appendicitis may have a varied aetiology such as faecoliths, pinworms, lymphoid hyperplasia, foreign bodies, amebiasis, tuberculosis, endometriosis or tumour in patients presenting with clinical appendicitis [1, 5]. In addition to luminal obstruction, other potential primary causes of appendicitis have been implicated including viral and bacterial [6]. Invasive pathogens such as Fusobacteria were found to have a positive correlation to the severity of acute appendicitis [7]. Organisms including Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus spp, Enterococcus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa have all been detected by culture [8] suggesting a possible causative relationship and ongoing microbiome studies are investigating the role of microbiota dysbiosis leading to acute appendicitis [9, 10]. Seasonal variations have also been shown to affect the incidence of acute appendicitis in several studies, with the highest incidence of acute appendicitis seen in spring and summer months [11].

Previous studies including large international study [3] have demonstrated the significance of faecoliths in acute appendicitis and its associated complications. However, most of the studies utilised abdominal CT scans to assess the presence of faecoliths [12,13,14,15,16,17]. Several of these studies have correlated the size and location of faecoliths in relation to the severity of appendicitis, while other studies have assessed histopathological parameters, comparing uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis [12, 14, 18]. There is to date, however, no published study that assesses the presence of faecoliths using methodology inclusive of pre-operative imaging, intra-operative findings, and histology; the composite of which may well give a more complete appraisal of their role.

In this study, we used the above methodology to assess the rate at which faecoliths were present in acute appendicitis treated with appendicectomy, and whether the presence of faecoliths was associated with complicated appendicitis.


This study retrospectively reviewed all appendectomies performed between January 2018 and December 2019 at Christchurch Hospital, Canterbury, New Zealand. Patients were identified using the institution’s prospectively recorded electronic database that logs all acute and elective operations.

Data were collected from an electronic clinical records system. This included age, sex, admission date, length of stay, discharge date, complications and readmissions and operative data were which was created at the time of the operation using a synoptic operating note that positively or negatively recorded the intraoperative finding of a faecolith, perforation and the degree of contamination. Histological data included the presence and severity of appendicitis, perforation and the presence of faecoliths.

A faecolith was defined as present if identified by at least one of the three possible methods (pre-operative CT scan, intraoperative or histopathology report). It was assumed absent if not identified by any of the three methods. Complicated appendicitis was defined as appendicitis with perforation, gangrene and/or periappendicular abscess formation.

All patients aged 18 years old or older who had appendicectomies were included. Appendicectomies performed in conjunction with right colonic resection, other bowel resection, gynaecological and/or pelvic operations were excluded. Appendicitis treated non-operatively was excluded, as histological confirmation of the diagnosis was not available.

Statistical analyses were undertaken using Rstudio. A Mann–Whitney U test was used for comparing age in appendicitis versus non-appendicitis and faecolith versus non-faecolith, while Odds Ratios with p values and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all other analyses.


A total of 1035 appendicectomies were performed in the 2-year period. Forty cases did not fulfil the inclusion criteria, and 22 cases had acute appendicitis with a tumour. Of the remainder, 860 patients had acute appendicitis, and in 113 cases, histology demonstrated a normal appendix. Faecoliths were present in 339 of the 973 appendicectomy cases (35%) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of all appendectomies performed

These faecolith cases were identified using at least one of the three modalities as demonstrated in Fig. 2. The total number of faecoliths are not accumulative of each modality.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Modalities identifying faecoliths in all appendicectomies

The median age of the 860 patients with histologically proven appendicitis was 35 years (IQR 25–50 years), compared to the normal appendix group median age of 23 years (IQR 20–84; p < 0.001). Preoperative CT scan was carried out in 423 patients (49%) in the appendicitis group and 14 cases in the normal appendix group. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall faecolith rate among patients with acute appendicitis (34%) compared to the normal appendix group (40%) (OR 0.75 and 95% CI 0.5–1.12, p = 0.160). (Table 1).

Table 1 Difference between appendicitis and normal appendix group

Among the acute appendicitis, 314 cases (37%) had complicated appendicitis (with gangrene/perforation) and 546 (64%) simple appendicitis.

The faecolith group were statistically significantly older (median 40 years (range 18–91 years)) than the non-faecolith group [median 33 years (range 18–82 years), (p < 0.001)]. There was no significant association between gender and the presence of a faecolith (Table 2).

Table 2 Demographic and clinical data for patients with acute appendicitis

A faecolith was detected in 165 of the 314 (53%) patients with complicated appendicitis compared with 128 of the 546 (23%) patients with simple appendicitis (OR 3.62, 95% CI 2.69–4.87, p < 0.001). After controlling for age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.04), the OR between faecolith and complicated appendicitis remained highly significant (OR 3.30, 95% CI 2.44–4.49). There were statistically significantly increased post-operative major complications and a longer inpatient stay in the faecolith group compared to the non-faecolith group, as demonstrated in Table 3.

Table 3 Difference between faecolith and non-faecolith group in the appendicitis group


This study demonstrated a faecolith was present in 34% of all patients with appendicitis and the presence of a faecolith was associated with a greater than threefold increase in complicated appendicitis. In previously published reports, the range of faecolith presence in acute appendicitis has varied widely from 3.6 to 17% [19, 20]. In the present study, the detection rate for faecoliths was considerably higher (34%) compared to these other published studies. This is potentially due to the more exhaustive methodology used for faecolith detection including utilising pre-operative CT scans, synoptic operating reports and histopathology reports and therefore represents a more accurate estimation of the rate of faecolith presence in acute appendicitis.

In addition to the wide reported range of rates of faecoliths in acute appendicitis, their association with the pathogenesis of appendicitis itself remains controversial. One retrospective study looked at 1357 appendicectomies and found that faecoliths were present in 13.7% of cases and showed a significant association between faecolith presence and acute appendicitis [20]. In contrast, a study by Singh et al. [21] argued that faecoliths were an incidental finding and their prevalence too low to be considered as the cause of non-perforated appendicitis. These authors analysed 1014 appendicectomies for suspected appendicitis, of which 741 were in adult and 273 in paediatric patients. They found that the overall faecolith rate was higher in normal appendices than those with acute appendicitis in both the paediatric (28.6% vs. 18.1%) and adult groups (31.6% vs 13.7%). Another large retrospective review [15] of 4670 cases showed that only 3.6% of appendicectomies contained faecoliths, in which 60.5% were faecoliths found in normal appendices.

In the current study, the rate of faecoliths present in normal appendices was 40% compared with 34% in the appendicitis group. This difference did not reach statistical significance once again challenging whether faecoliths have a role in the pathogenesis of appendicitis. Other aetiologies such as endometriosis, lymphoid hyperplasia, pin worms and carcinoid tumours were found during histology assessment in some of the appendix specimens in this study. Given the population for the study was drawn from symptomatic patients, the presence of appendiceal faecoliths may be higher than the general population if they are considered a potential cause of right iliac fossa pain in the absence of appendiceal inflammation (appendiceal colic).

Accumulating evidence suggests that appendicitis with an associated faecolith follows a more severe course than appendicitis without a faecolith. A study by Mallien et al. [14] showed a histological difference between acute appendicitis presenting with and without a faecolith. Appendicitis with a faecolith had more crypt destruction, severe acute inflammation and micro-abscesses (27.3% vs 13.4%, p = 0.016). A recent randomised controlled trial demonstrated an overall faecolith rate of 17% with the visualisation of faecoliths on preoperative imaging, the only factor associated with complicated appendicitis (53%; p < 0.0001) and with failure of antibiotic treatment (50%; p = 0.0072) [22]. This is further confirmed in the CODA trial where participants with appendicolith treated with antibiotics treatment were associated with higher complications (20.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 5.69; 95% CI 2.11–15.38) [3]. Similarly, in the present study, patients with complicated appendicitis were 3.6 times more likely to have faecoliths compared to patients with simple appendicitis and had higher rates of post-operative complications. This is also reflected in the latest WSES guideline for managing acute appendicitis where non-operative management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis is only deemed safe alternative to surgery in the absence of faecolith [4].

Complicated appendicitis is often associated with higher morbidity such as unresolved abscess or sepsis, post-operative complications, longer hospital stays and readmissions. A recent study of 150 patients who underwent appendicectomy for acute appendicitis showed that patients with perforated appendicitis were more likely to be older (64.5 years versus 38.5 years, p < 0.001), have an appendiceal faecolith (70%) and have longer postoperative length of stay (7 days versus 3 days, p < 0.001) than the non-perforated group [23]. In the present analysis, the complicated appendicitis group was statistically significantly older and four times more likely to have a moderate to severe complication. Even though the presence of faecoliths did not affect the readmission rate, there were more grade 3 complications among the readmissions within the faecolith group (12 versus 6 cases) and a prolonged inpatient stay (2.1 days versus 1.9 days, p 0.001). These results support the hypothesis that the presence of a faecolith in patients with acute appendicitis should be classified as high risk for complicated appendicitis warranting emergency appendicectomy and exclusion from non-operative management of acute appendicitis. The limitations of this study include its retrospective nature from a single centre, the variation in reporting of faecoliths in pathology reports and potential loss of faecoliths while transporting the specimens. Overall, this study used robust methodology which allowed a more accurate faecolith capture and rate estimation compared to other studies.


The rigorous methodology of this study has demonstrated a higher rate of faecolith presences in acute appendicitis than previously documented. It reinforces that the presence of a faecolith in acute appendicitis is a strong predictor of a more severe course of acute appendicitis and thus highlights the importance of clinical prioritisation for emergency surgery and postoperative monitoring for complications.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed are included in this published article.


  1. Wickramasinghe DP, Xavier C, Samarasekera DN. The worldwide epidemiology of acute appendicitis: an analysis of the global health data exchange dataset. World J Surg. 2021;45(7):1999–2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. de Wijkerslooth EML, van den Boom AL, Wijnhoven BPL. Disease burden of appendectomy for appendicitis: a population-based cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2020;34(1):116–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Collaborative TC. A randomized trial comparing antibiotics with appendectomy for appendicitis. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(20):1907–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Di Saverio S, Podda M, De Simone B, Ceresoli M, Augustin G, Gori A, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines. World J Emerg Surg. 2020;15(1):27.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Shahmoradi MK, Zarei F, Beiranvand M, Hosseinnia Z. A retrospective descriptive study based on etiology of appendicitis among patients undergoing appendectomy. Int J Surg Open. 2021;31:100326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lamps L. Infectious causes of appendicitis. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2010;24(4):995–1018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Swidsinski A, Dorffel Y, Loening-Baucke V, Theissig F, Ruckert JC, Ismail M, et al. Acute appendicitis is characterised by local invasion with Fusobacterium nucleatum/necrophorum. Gut. 2011;60(1):34–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vanhatalo S, Munukka E, Sippola S, Jalkanen S, Gronroos J, Marttila H, et al. Prospective multicentre cohort trial on acute appendicitis and microbiota, aetiology and effects of antimicrobial treatment: study protocol for the MAPPAC (Microbiology APPendicitis ACuta) trial. BMJ Open. 2019;9(9):e031137.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Oh SJ, Pimentel M, Leite GGS, Celly S, Villanueva-Millan MJ, Lacsina I, et al. Acute appendicitis is associated with appendiceal microbiome changes including elevated Campylobacter jejuni levels. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2020;7(1):e000412.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Toon-Peeters JP, Smeekens SP, Galazzo G, Houben B, Netea MG, Savelkoul PHM, Gyssens IC. The fecal and mucosal microbiome in acute appendicitis patients: an observational study. Fut Microbiol. 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Reinisch A, Heil J, Woeste G, Bechstein W, Liese J. The meteorological influence on seasonal alterations in the course of acute appendicitis. J Surg Res. 2017;217:137–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ishiyama M, Yanase F, Taketa T, Makidono A, Suzuki K, Omata F, et al. Significance of size and location of appendicoliths as exacerbating factor of acute appendicitis. Emerg Radiol. 2013;20(2):125–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sartelli M, Baiocchi GL, Di Saverio S, Ferrara F, Labricciosa FM, Ansaloni L, et al. Prospective observational study on acute appendicitis worldwide (POSAW). World J Emerg Surg. 2018;13:19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Mallinen J, Vaarala S, Makinen M, Lietzen E, Gronroos J, Ohtonen P, et al. Appendicolith appendicitis is clinically complicated acute appendicitis-is it histopathologically different from uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019;34(8):1393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chandrasegaram MD, Rothwell LA, An EI, Miller RJ. Pathologies of the appendix: a 10-year review of 4670 appendicectomy specimens. ANZ J Surg. 2012;82(11):844–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bhangu A, Søreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH, Drake FT. Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2015;386(10000):1278–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh JP, Mariadason JG. Role of the faecolith in modern-day appendicitis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013;95(1):48–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Ando T, Oka T, Oshima G, Handa K, Maeda S, Yuasa Y, et al. Fecalith in the proximal area of the appendix is a predictor of failure of nonoperative treatment for complicated appendicitis in adults. J Surg Res. 2021;267:477–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Maenza RL, Linda S, Wolfson AB. Myth of faecolith. Am J Emerg Med. 1996;14(4):394.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ramdass MJ, Young Sing Q, Milne D, Mooteeram J, Barrow S. Association between the appendix and the fecalith in adults. Can J Surg. 2015;58(1):10–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Singh JP, Mariadason JG. Role of the faecolith in modern-day appendicitis. Ann R College Surg England. 2013;95:48–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vons C, Barry C, Maitre S, Pautrat K, Leconte M, Costaglioli B, et al. Amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid versus appendicectomy for treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;377(9777):1573–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yamazaki S, Shimodaira Y, Kobayashi A, Takata M, Hayashibara K, Sakon M, et al. Predictive factors of perforated appendicitis: Impact of the C-reactive protein level. Surg Open Sci. 2021;6:1–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


No external funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



T.E contributed to conceptualisation, validation and project administration. T.E and F.F were involved in methodology and supervision. A.M contributed to software. M.S.L was involved data curation and resources. M.S.L, A.M contributed to formal analysis. M.S.L, R.P, T.E were involved writing—original draft. T.E, F.F, R.P contributed to writing—review & editing. M.S.L and F.F were involved visualisation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mei Sze Lee.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Granted from University of Otago Human Ethics Health Committee (HD20/026).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declares that they have no competing interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, M.S., Purcell, R., McCombie, A. et al. Retrospective cohort study of the impact of faecoliths on the natural history of acute appendicitis. World J Emerg Surg 18, 18 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: