Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 22, 2026

Quadruple-Checkerboard: A Modification of the Three-Dimensional Checkerboard for Studying Drug Combinations
Published on: July 24, 2021
Dual versus Triple Antibiotics Regimen in Children with Perforated Acute Appendicitis
Yael Dreznik1, Elad Feigin2, Inbal Samuk2
1Department of General Surgery, Sheba Medical Center, Tel HaShomer, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Insights
Dual antibiotic therapy (ceftriaxone and metronidazole) is a cost-effective alternative to triple antibiotic therapy for perforated appendicitis in children. While not statistically significant, further research is needed to confirm safety regarding wound infections.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Surgery
- Infectious Diseases
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Acute appendicitis is a common pediatric surgical emergency.
- Historically, triple-antibiotic therapy was standard for perforated appendicitis.
- Recent evidence suggests dual therapy is more efficient and cost-effective.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare postoperative outcomes of triple versus dual antibiotic therapy for perforated appendicitis in children.
- Evaluate complications such as wound infections, antibiotic changes, and length of stay.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of medical records for children with perforated appendicitis who underwent appendectomy (2007-2011).
- Group A received triple therapy (ampicillin, gentamicin, metronidazole) (2007-2009).
- Group B received dual therapy (ceftriaxone, metronidazole) (2009-2011).
Main Results:
- 175 patients with perforated appendicitis were analyzed (89 in Group A, 86 in Group B).
- No significant differences in demographics, length of stay, or readmission rates.
- Higher rates of wound infection and antibiotic therapy changes were observed in Group B, though not statistically significant (p=0.064).
Conclusions:
- Dual antibiotic therapy presents a cost-effective and efficient option for perforated appendicitis.
- Prospective studies are necessary to confirm the safety and efficacy of dual therapy, particularly concerning wound infection rates.
Introduction:
Acute appendicitis is the most common emergency condition in pediatric surgery. Historically, a triple-antibiotic therapy consisted of ampicillin, gentamicin, and clindamycin has been used postoperatively for perforated appendicitis. According to recently published trials, dual therapy consists of ceftriaxone and metronidazole only, offers a more efficient and cost-effective antibiotic management compared with triple therapy. Based on these results, our department applied dual antibiotic therapy for children with perforated appendicitis that underwent appendectomy from 2009 and forth.
Aim:
The aim of our study was to compare postoperative outcomes between patients treated with triple therapy (ampicillin, gentamicin, and metronidazole) (group A) versus dual therapy (ceftriaxone and metronidazole) (group B).
Methods:
Clinical and laboratory data were retrospectively collected by review of the medical records for all children who underwent appendectomy for the perforated appendix at the Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel, a tertiary pediatric care center between 2007 and 2011. Children with perforated appendicitis received antibiotic therapy in accordance with the hospital's guidelines that were valid at the time the surgery took place. In the first period (years 2007-2009) (group A) a triad of ampicillin, gentamicin, and metronidazole and the second period (2009-2011) (group B) dual therapy consists of ceftriaxone and metronidazole. The two groups were compared for outcome and complications, such as wound infections, changing of antibiotic therapy, and length of stay.
Results:
During the study period 1,203 patients underwent an appendectomy. Of these, 175 patients were diagnosed with perforated appendix and were treated with postoperative antibiotic's regimen. Group A and group B consisted of 89 and 86 patients, respectively. The two groups were not different significantly in terms of demographic data, length of stay, or readmission rates. However, more rates of wound infection and changing of antibiotic therapy were seen in group B, although not statistically significant (p = 0.064).
Conclusion:
Dual antibiotic therapy for perforated appendicitis is a cost-effective and efficient mode of therapy compared with triple-antibiotic's regimen. However, prospective studies are required to determine whether this policy is associated with higher rates of wound infections and change in antibiotic therapy.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...
Acute Pyelonephritis II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Treating Helicobacter pylori in Peptic Ulcers: Antimicrobial Therapy
Appendicitis-I: Introduction
Etiology: Appendicitis can arise from various causes, primarily rooted in the obstruction of the appendix lumen. Factors contributing to this obstruction include fecal accumulation, lymphoid hyperplasia and, in...
Urinary Tract Infection III: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Pharmaceutical Alternatives: Stability-Related Therapeutic Nonequivalence

