Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “APPENDICITIS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Acute appendicitis: comparison of helical CT diagnosis focused technique with oral contrast material versus nonfocused technique with oral and intravenous contrast material.

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of focused helical computed tomography (CT) with orally administered contrast material with that of nonfocused helical CT with orally and intravenously administered contrast material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After receiving oral contrast material, 228 patients with clinically suspected appendicitis underwent focused appendiceal CT (5-mm section thickness, 15-cm coverage in the right lower quadrant). Immediately thereafter, helical CT of the entire abdomen and pelvis was performed following intravenous administration of contrast material (abdomen, 7-mm section thickness; pelvis, 5-mm section thickness). Studies were separated and independently interpreted by three observers who were blinded to patient names. Diagnoses were established by means of surgical and/or clinical follow-up findings. RESULTS: Fifty-one (22.4%) of 228 patients had acute appendicitis. Readers diagnosed appendicitis with 83.3%, 73.8%, and 71.4% sensitivity and 93.0%, 92.3%, and 97.9% specificity with focused nonenhanced appendiceal CT. Readers diagnosed appendicitis with 92.9%, 92.9%, and 88.1% sensitivity and 93.7%, 95.1%, and 96.5% specificity with nonfocused enhanced CT. Summary areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve estimates for focused nonenhanced and nonfocused enhanced CT were 0.916 and 0.964, respectively; the differences were statistically significant (P <.05) for two of three readers. All readers demonstrated higher sensitivities for detecting the inflamed appendix with nonfocused enhanced CT. Appendicitis was missed with focused CT in two patients whose inflamed appendix was not included in the imaging of the right lower quadrant. All readers were significantly more confident in diagnosing alternative conditions with nonfocused enhanced CT. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracy of helical CT for acute appendicitis improved significantly with use of intravenous contrast material.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2001

Nonenhanced limited CT in children suspected of having appendicitis: prospective comparison of attending and resident interpretations.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare resident and attending radiologic interpretations of nonenhanced limited computed tomographic (CT) scans obtained in children suspected of having appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five consecutive children underwent nonenhanced limited CT for suspected appendicitis. The scans were prospectively interpreted by a resident and an attending radiologist, each unaware of the other's interpretation. The probability that the findings indicated a diagnosis of appendicitis, level of certainty in the interpretation, and presence of an alternate diagnosis were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Nineteen children (25%) had appendicitis. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was not significantly different between residents (0.97 +/- 0.02) and attendings (0.95 +/- 0.04). The percentage agreement between residents and attendings was 91% (kappa = 0.73 +/- 0.095). The average level of certainty tended to be higher for attendings (93% +/- 15) than residents (89% +/- 12). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of resident interpretations were 63%, 96%, and 88%, respectively, compared with those of attending interpretations--95%, 98%, and 97%, respectively. Residents and attendings noted alternate diagnoses in 30% of children without appendicitis. CONCLUSION: A high level of agreement exists between resident and attending radiologists in the interpretation of nonenhanced limited CT scans in children suspected of having appendicitis. Residents, however, tend to be less confident in their interpretations.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Imaging for suspected appendicitis: negative appendectomy and perforation rates.

PURPOSE: To determine which patients suspected of having acute appendicitis benefit from preoperative imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 462 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy for clinically suspected acute appendicitis and underwent preoperative evaluation at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into four groups: women (n = 166), girls (n = 46), men (n = 178), and boys (n = 72). Preoperative computed tomography (CT) or ultrasonography (US), requested by the referring clinician, was performed in 313 of the 462 patients. Unnecessary, or negative, appendectomy and perforation rates were calculated for each group for preoperative evaluation with CT, with US, and with neither CT nor US. In addition, the sensitivity and positive predictive value of CT and US were calculated for diagnosing appendicitis. RESULTS: In women, the negative appendectomy rate was significantly lower for those who underwent preoperative CT (7% [six of 85 patients], P =.005) or US (8% [four of 49 patients], P =.019), as compared with 28% [nine of 32 patients] for those who underwent no preoperative imaging (P >.35 for all groups). The negative appendectomy rates for girls, men, and boys were not significantly affected by preoperative imaging. The sensitivity of CT and US for diagnosing acute appendicitis exceeded 93% and 77%, respectively, in all groups. The positive predictive values for both CT and US were greater than 92% in all groups. CONCLUSION: Women suspected of having appendicitis benefit the most from preoperative CT or US, with a statistically significantly lower negative appendectomy rate than women who undergo no preoperative imaging. Therefore, we propose that preoperative imaging be considered part of the routine evaluation of women suspected of having acute appendicitis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2004

Suspected appendicitis in children: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced versus nonenhanced Helical CT.

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of limited-area (lower abdominal) nonenhanced helical computed tomography (CT), intravenous contrast material-enhanced helical CT of the entire abdomen, and the combination of both. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred six children suspected of having appendicitis, who were previously included in a prospective study, underwent limited-area nonenhanced helical CT of the lower abdomen and contrast-enhanced CT of the entire abdomen. No oral or rectal contrast material was administered. The CT scans were retrospectively reviewed by three independent readers both separately and together. The readers were blinded to all clinical information and to the results of previous ultrasonographic and CT examinations. Final diagnoses were established on the basis of surgical, histopathologic, or clinical follow-up findings. The Pearson chi(2) test was performed to compare values between groups. The Student two-sample t test was performed to determine statistically significant differences in age and sex. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine patients (42%) had appendicitis. Readers diagnosed appendicitis with 66% pooled sensitivity and 96% pooled specificity with limited-area nonenhanced CT. With contrast-enhanced CT of the entire abdomen, appendicitis was diagnosed with 90% pooled sensitivity and 94% pooled specificity. With both sequences together, readers diagnosed appendicitis with 90% pooled sensitivity and 94% pooled specificity. The difference between the sensitivity of limited-area nonenhanced CT and that of contrast-enhanced CT was statistically significant (P <.001). CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of helical CT for suspected appendicitis in children improved significantly with abdominal contrast-enhanced CT compared with limited-area nonenhanced CT. No further improvement in sensitivity was achieved with the combination of both sequences in comparison to that with contrast-enhanced CT alone.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Perforated versus nonperforated acute appendicitis: accuracy of multidetector CT detection.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the accuracy of multidetector computed tomography (CT) in the diagnosis of perforated acute appendicitis by using surgery and pathologic examination combined as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Informed patient consent was waived. The authors retrospectively identified 244 patients (150 male, 94 female; mean age, 32.8 years; age range, 4-83 years) with pathologically proved acute appendicitis who underwent abdominopelvic multidetector CT. Two radiologists reviewed in consensus the multidetector CT images obtained in all patients for various findings that may be associated with appendiceal perforation. For continuous variables, a comparison of means between the perforated and nonperforated groups was performed by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. For categorical variables, the sensitivity and specificity of each CT finding for the diagnosis of perforated appendicitis were determined. RESULTS: The CT findings of abscess (99%), extraluminal gas (98%), and ileus (93%) had the highest specificities for appendiceal perforation; however, the sensitivities of these findings were low: 34%, 35%, and 53%, respectively. The appendix was larger in patients with perforated appendicitis: The mean diameter was 15.1 mm compared with a mean diameter of 11.7 mm in patients with nonperforated appendicitis (P < .001). Appendicolith, free fluid, enlarged abdominal lymph nodes, and enhancement defect in the appendiceal wall were neither highly sensitive nor highly specific for the detection of perforation. CONCLUSION: Although certain multidetector CT findings are very specific for the diagnosis of perforated appendicitis, overall multidetector CT sensitivity is poor. Unless abscess or extraluminal gas is present, multidetector CT cannot enable the diagnosis of perforation.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1991

Appendicitis: prospective evaluation with high-resolution CT.

Computed tomography (CT) was used to prospectively evaluate 100 patients with clinical indications for acute appendicitis. Examinations were performed with the terminal ileum and cecum filled with contrast material. Acute appendicitis was diagnosed when an abnormal appendix or inflammatory changes plus an appendicolith were detected. Failure to visualize an abnormal appendix or appendicolith in the presence of pericecal inflammatory changes was considered suspicious but nonspecific. CT results were correlated with surgical and pathologic results (74 patients) and other radiologic and clinical findings (26 patients). CT helped to diagnose appendicitis (64 patients) and nonspecific right lower quadrant inflammation (five patients) and to rule out appendicitis (31 patients). CT had a 98% sensitivity, an 83% specificity, and a 93% accuracy. In 17 of 31 patients without CT evidence of appendicitis, other conditions explaining their symptoms were detected. When the clinical diagnosis is in doubt, CT can be used successfully to evaluate patients with acute appendicitis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Spontaneously resolving appendicitis: frequency and natural history in 60 patients.

PURPOSE: To establish the frequency and natural history of ultrasonographically (US) documented spontaneously resolving appendicitis following conservative treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 1987 to July 1997, the authors encountered 106 patients with US-diagnosed spontaneously resolving appendicitis. We retrospectively studied clinical data and US findings obtained at admission and follow-up relating to 60 patients who were treated conservatively. Over the same 10 years, 1,280 appendectomies for acute appendicitis were performed in the authors' hospital. RESULTS: Of 60 patients, 23 (38%) had recurrent appendicitis after a median of 14 weeks (range, 2-254 weeks), with 16 (70%) having recurrence within 1 year of the first attack. US findings indicated that patients with an appendiceal diameter of at least 8 mm were more prone to recurrence than patients with an appendiceal diameter of less than 8 mm; the recurrence rates were 47% (21 of 45 patients) and 13% (two of 15 patients). The other parameters did not show a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: Spontaneously resolving appendicitis occurs in at least one in 13 cases of appendicitis and has an overall recurrence rate of 38%, with the majority of cases reccurring within 1 year.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Evaluation of suspected appendicitis in children and young adults: helical CT.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of helical computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of appendicitis in children and to assess the utility of CT in establishing alternative diagnoses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 154 children (median age, 12 years; age range, 1-20 years) who were suspected to have appendicitis and who underwent CT were reviewed. The gastrointestinal tract was opacified in 151 of 154 patients: Only orally administered contrast material was used in 126 patients; only rectally administered contrast material, in 21 patients; and both oral and rectal contrast material, in four patients. CT findings were correlated with surgical and histopathologic findings or with clinical follow-up findings. RESULTS: Sixty-four CT scans were interpreted as positive for appendicitis and included 58 true-positive and six false-positive scans. Ninety scans were interpreted as negative and included 87 true-negative and three false-negative scans. CT had a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 94% for the diagnosis of appendicitis. In addition, in 32 (34%) of 93 patients without appendicitis, an alternative diagnosis was established on the basis of CT findings. CONCLUSION: Helical CT is useful in a pediatric population to diagnose or exclude appendicitis and to establish an alternative diagnosis.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

The history is important in patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis is incorrect in 20-30% of patients undergoing surgery. We analysed the clinical importance of nine commonly used symptoms and signs in 544 consecutive patients with regard to the correct diagnosis of acute appendicitis. METHODS: Open population-based prospective study. The degree of the surgeon's certainty of the preoperative diagnosis was assessed. The final diagnosis was based on histology. Logistic regression was used to analyze the independent value of nine symptoms and signs to predict acute appendicitis by calculating odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In 434 of 544 patients (80%) acute appendicitis was confirmed. A history of nausea or vomiting (OR = 2.3; CI = 1.11 to 4.76) and pain migration to right iliac fossa (OR = 1.9; CI = 1.12 to 3.22) were significant predictors of acute appendicitis. Pain migration was found to be an independent predictor in females and nausea or vomiting in males. In the group of patients (29%) with an uncertain preoperative diagnosis, pain migration predicted a correct diagnosis in females (OR = 4.7; CI = 1.2 to 18), while tenderness over McBurney's point was a significant predictor in males (OR = 8.3; CI = 1.1 to 63). CONCLUSIONS: A history of pain migration and nausea or vomiting were independent predictors for the correct diagnosis of acute appendicitis in patients undergoing surgery. Thus, patient history is important in this patient group.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2002

Acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: To analyze the diagnosis and surgical treatment of acute appendicitis during pregnancy. METHODS: The records of 24 pregnant patients who underwent surgery with preliminary diagnosis of acute appendicitis between January 1990 and July 2000 were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Between January 1990 and July 2000, there were 31,480 deliveries and the incidence of acute appendicitis was 1/1,312. Twenty patients had pathologically proven acute appendicitis (83.3%). Of the remaining 4 patients, one had hemorrhagic ovarian cyst, one had ovarian cyst rupture and in two cases no surgical pathology was diagnosed. Gestational stage at the diagnosis was first trimester in 7 patients, second trimester in 12 patients and third trimester in 5 patients. Five patients had abortions and premature delivery occurred in 2 patients. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis of acute appendicitis is difficult in pregnancy. Delay in diagnosis and surgery results in increase in complications. Emergency surgical intervention should be performed when acute appendicitis is suspected during pregnancy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Acute appendicitis: is there a difference between children and adults?

Historically, the lack of classic symptoms and delay in presentation make diagnosing acute appendicitis more difficult in children, resulting in a higher perforation rate. Despite this, the morbidity of acute appendicitis is usually lower in children. We evaluated the current differences in clinical presentation, diagnostic clues, and the outcomes of acute appendicitis between the two age groups. A retrospective review of 210 consecutive cases of pediatric appendectomy and 744 adult cases for suspected acute appendicitis from January 1995 to December 2000. Pediatric patients were defined as being 13 years and younger. Pediatric patients were similar to adult patients with respect to duration of pain before presentation (2.4 +/- 4.3 days vs 2.5 +/- 7.3 days), number of patients previously evaluated (22.0 vs 17.7%), number of imaging tests (computed tomography or ultrasound; 32.9 vs 40.2%), and number of patients observed (16.7 vs 17.2%). However, pediatric patients required less time for emergency room evaluation (4.0 +/- 2.7 hours vs 5.7 +/- 4.9 hours, P = 0.0001). In children and adults, a history of classic, migrating pain had the highest positive predictive value (94.2 vs 89.6%), followed by a white blood cell count > or =12 x 109/L (91.5 vs 84.3%). The overall negative appendectomy rate was 10.0 per cent for children and 19.0 per cent for adults (P = 0.003); the perforation rate was 19.0 per cent and 13.8 per cent, respectively (P > 0.05). The perforation rate in children was not associated with a delay in presentation (perforated cases, 2.9 +/- 3.3 days compared with nonperforated cases, 2.3 +/- 4.6 days). Mortality and morbidity, including wound infection rate and intra-abdominal abscess rate, were similar. Contrary to traditional teaching, diagnosing acute appendicitis in children is similar to that in adults. A history of migratory pain together with physical findings and leukocytosis remain accurate diagnostic clues for children and adults. Perforation rate and morbidity in children is similar to those in adults. The outcomes of acute appendicitis in children are not associated with a delay in presentation or delay in diagnosis.

Abdominal Pain↗
PubMed1991

The value of laboratory tests in patients suspected of acute appendicitis.

The clinical usefulness of laboratory tests was examined in 258 patients admitted to the emergency room with the general practitioner's tentative diagnosis, acute appendicitis. Acute appendectomy was performed on 91 patients. Histological examination of the appendix confirmed the diagnosis in 69 cases (acute appendicitis 20, phlegmonous appendicitis 36, perforation 13). Seven patients with appendicular infiltrate were not subjected to operation but the diagnosis was clear from clinical examination. On close examination/operation by the surgical team, 96 admitted patients were excluded from the primary diagnosis, acute appendicitis, and served as a control group. Receiver Operation Characteristic curves (ROC-curves) showed that the sensitivity and specificity and hence diagnostic efficiency for total white blood cell count, number of segmented leukocytes and C-reactive protein concentration for the detection of acute appendicitis were higher than for erythrocyte sedimentation rate, alpha 1-antiproteinase concentration and body temperature. We observed that when all three parameters, C-reactive protein, white blood cell count and segmented leukocytes, are within the normal range the diagnosis, acute appendicitis is highly unlikely. The diagnostic value of the different laboratory parameters appears, moreover, to be highly dependent on the degree of inflammation/perforation and the development of appendicular infiltration. However, diagnostic efficiency can be improved, and unnecessary surgery prevented, by performance of an appropriately selected combination of laboratory tests combined with evaluation of clinical symptoms.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

Serum amyloid A protein levels as a possible aid in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children.

Hematological and biochemical tests, including white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) and other acute-phase reactants, have been used in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. However, there is controversy among physicians about the value of this practice in children. The objective of our study was to evaluate serum amyloid A protein (SAA) levels in children with confirmed acute appendicitis and to compare the sensitivity and specificity of this marker of inflammation with those for WBC and CRP. A prospective cohort study of 60 children admitted with abdominal pain to rule out appendicitis was used in the study. Of these, 42 underwent surgery, while 18 children who had spontaneous amelioration within 24 h of admission were not operated on and served as controls. WBC and serum SAA and CRP levels were obtained preoperatively. Serum concentrations of the analytes were determined with particle-enhanced immunonephelometric methods. Patients with acute appendicitis had WBC, SAA and CRP levels higher than those of the control group (p<0.001). There was no appendicitis patient with a normal SAA value, while 21.4% of the patients had CRP values within the normal range. The performance of each test was measured by receiver-operating characteristic curves. Area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.849 for WBC, 0.868 for CRP and 0.964 for SAA. The sensitivity and specificity of these methods were 76% and 75% for WBC>10.0 x 10(9) /L, 62% and 94% for CRP>10 mg/L and 86% and 83% for SAA >45.0 mg/L, respectively. Circulating SAA levels have better discriminatory value than WBC or CRP in the assessment of acute appendicitis in children. Thus, this test appears to be of higher value than the current standards of care in the diagnosis of this condition.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Costs and effectiveness of ultrasonography and limited computed tomography for diagnosing appendicitis in children.

BACKGROUND: A protocol of ultrasonography (US) followed by computed tomography with rectal contrast (CTRC) has been shown to be 94% accurate in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the changes in patient management and costs of a protocol using US and CTRC in the evaluation of appendicitis in children. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS: Prospective cohort study of 139 children between 3 and 21 years of age who had equivocal clinical findings for acute appendicitis seen in the emergency department of a large, urban pediatric teaching hospital between July 1998 and December 1998. PROTOCOL: Children with equivocal clinical presentations for acute appendicitis were prospectively evaluated with US. Patients with positive findings for acute appendicitis went directly to the operating room. Patients with negative or equivocal findings on US underwent CTRC. Surgical management plans were recorded before imaging, after US, and after CTRC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical management plans before and after the imaging protocol as well as total hospital direct and indirect costs incurred or saved by each change in management were determined. Costs were obtained through the hospital's cost database and by ratios of costs to charges. RESULTS: Of the 139 children, the protocol resulted in a beneficial change in management in 86 children (61.9%), no change in management in 50 children (36.0%) and an incorrect change in management in 3 children (2.1%). US alone resulted in a beneficial change in management decision in 12/31 children (38.7%), while US followed by CTRC resulted in a beneficial change in management in 74/108 children (68.5%). The protocol resulted in a total cost savings of $78 503.99 or $565/patient. CONCLUSION: A protocol of US followed by CTRC in children with negative or equivocal US examinations results in a high rate of beneficial change in management as well as in total cost savings in children with equivocal clinical presentations for suspected appendicitis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Effect of pediatric surgical practice on the treatment of children with appendicitis.

OBJECTIVE: Acute appendicitis in children is managed by both general surgeons (GSs) and pediatric surgeons (PSs). Our objective was to investigate the economics of surgical care provided by either GSs or PSs for appendicitis. METHODS: The outcome of children within our state who underwent operative treatment for appendicitis (January 1994 to June 1997) by board-certified GSs were compared with the results of PSs. Data were sorted according to patient age and diagnosis according to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision. Analysis of variance was performed on continuous data, and chi(2) analysis was performed on nominal data; data are depicted as mean +/- standard error of the mean. RESULTS: GSs (n = 2178) managed older children when compared with PSs (n = 1018; 11.0 +/- 0.1 vs 9.1 +/- 0.1 years) and less frequently treated perforated appendicitis (18.8% vs 31.9%). Independent of diagnosis (simple or perforated appendicitis), younger children (0-4 years, 5-8 years, and 9-12 years) who were treated by PSs had a significantly shorter hospital stay and/or decreased hospital charge when compared with those who were treated by GSs. However, older children (13-15 years) seemed to have comparable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Younger children with appendicitis have reduced hospital days and charges when they are treated by PSs.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Racial and socioeconomic disparity in perforated appendicitis among children: where is the problem?

OBJECTIVE: Significant racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities have been observed in the rates of perforated appendicitis among children, by using large administrative databases. This study evaluated whether these factors had an impact on the care of patients with appendicitis at a major children's hospital with a well-established, comprehensive, primary referral system. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for all children between the ages of 2 and 20 years who were treated for appendicitis between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2003. Demographic variables included patient age, gender, race, insurance status, parental educational status, and income level. Coding data were used to identify patients with perforated appendicitis. The use of radiologic imaging was also analyzed. RESULTS: During the 3-year period, 788 patients were treated for appendicitis. The racial distribution (white: 81%; black: 12%; other: 7%) was consistent with the demographic composition of the local population. The overall perforation rate was 25%, and the rate was significantly greater in the age group of <6 years, compared with older children. However, there were no significant differences in the perforation rate with respect to race, insurance status, educational level, or income status. Rates of radiologic imaging use were similar among all racial and socioeconomic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although racial and socioeconomic disparities in the rates of perforated appendicitis among children have been reported, we found no significant evidence for such inequality at our institution. This may reflect improved access, early diagnosis, and referral by primary care physicians in the community. Pooled national and multiple-state administrative databases have been used to highlight persistent disparities in health care. This study illustrates how single-institution data sources can be used to test a local hypothesis generated by national data, with surprisingly different results.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2006

Ultrasound and white blood cell counts in suspected acute appendicitis.

The use of radiological studies as diagnostic tools in patients with suspected acute appendicitis has increased recently. In this setting, abdominal ultrasonography is viewed as a possible means of avoiding unnecessary surgery. This retrospective study of patients who underwent laparotomy for suspected acute appendicitis was undertaken to determine the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound in diagnosing acute appendicitis and the frequency of leucocytosis in patients in whom the diagnosis was confirmed by histology. The ultrasound and surgery registers were reviewed to identify 254 referrals for abdominal ultrasound between January 2001 and December 2002 because of a clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis. Of these cases, 223 did not proceed to surgery. The study sample comprised 31 patients who had appendectomies after abdominal ultrasonography. The ultrasound reports, pathological diagnoses and white blood cell counts of these patients were obtained and formed the basis for the analysis. A histological diagnosis was available for 30 cases, in 17 of whom appendicitis was confirmed In these patients, positive ultrasound and leucocytosis were present in five (29%) and nine (53%) respectively. Ultrasound showed 92% specificity and 29% sensitivity for the pre-operative diagnosis of appendicitis. The positive predictive value of ultrasonography (83%) was higher than that of leucocytosis (69%). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound and leucocytosis in this study indicate limited utility as preoperative diagnostic tools.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1998

Using unenhanced helical CT with enteric contrast material for suspected appendicitis in patients treated at a community hospital.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the accuracy of unenhanced helical CT with enteric contrast material in the diagnosis of appendicitis in children and adults treated at a community hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Over an 8-month period, 100 consecutive patients with right lower quadrant pain and suspected appendicitis were prospectively evaluated. Thin-collimation helical CT scanning was performed after administration of enteric contrast material. CT interpretations were correlated with surgical pathology (45 patients) and clinical follow-up (55 patients). RESULTS: The findings of 33 CT scans were interpreted as positive for appendicitis (29 true-positives and four false-positives), and the findings of 67 were interpreted as negative for appendicitis (66 true-negatives and one false-negative). Sensitivity was 97%, specificity was 94%, accuracy was 95%, positive predictive value was 88%, and negative predictive value was 99%. In the 67 CT scans with negative findings for appendicitis, an alternative diagnosis was made for 36 patients (54%). CONCLUSION: Unenhanced helical CT with enteric contrast material for the evaluation of appendicitis can be implemented in a community hospital. In our study, such imaging achieved excellent accuracy.

Adult↗