Computed tomography-based clinical diagnostic pathway for acute appendicitis: prospective validation

The Alvarado Score Is the Most Impactful Diagnostic Tool for Appendicitis: A Bibliometric Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this bibliometric analysis was to investigate the citation pattern of studies that have developed a diagnostic tool to diagnose appendicitis.

METHODS

We investigated characteristics of citations, publication frequency, evolution of citations, and fluctuation of previously highly cited studies. We analyzed which studies had been cited in the method section and identified impactful studies in this research field by a network visualization. We analyzed the differences in citations between diagnostic tools requiring a doctor to be present against the diagnostic tools not requiring doctors to be present, English language studies against non-English studies, and identified diagnostic tools targeting children.

RESULTS

There was an upward trend in publications in this research field, and between 1999-2021 the Alvarado score has been cited the most. In general, there was a high fluctuation, and 40 studies had been cited in the methods sections. There were significant differences in studies regarding diagnostic tools written in English compared to non-English studies, with more citations in the English-language studies. Furthermore, 22 studies had children as the target population.

CONCLUSIONS

The Alvarado score was the highest cited study since 1999, with 1086 citations, making it the most impactful study in this research field of diagnostic tools to diagnose appendicitis. Due to the diversity of target populations and settings for which diagnostic tools are developed, there is a need to expand research on diagnostic tools for appendicitis.

Many diagnostic tools for appendicitis: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

We aimed to provide an overview of all diagnostic tools developed to diagnose appendicitis with their reported accuracy and to further characterize these including their need for diagnostic equipment.

METHODS

This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews and a protocol was registered at Open Science Framework. We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature. We included original articles of all languages with the purpose to derive an accessible diagnostic tool. We extracted data regarding study- and diagnostic tool characteristics, and the accuracy of each diagnostic tool.

RESULTS

The search led to 6419 records, where 74 studies were included, yielding 82 diagnostic tools reported in seven different languages. Among these tools, 35% included patient characteristics, 85% symptoms, 93% physical examinations, 37% vital signs, 78% laboratory values, and 16% imaging. Among the diagnostic tools, 35% relied on a medical doctor/surgeon with access to a laboratory, and six diagnostic tools did not require a bedside medical doctor/surgeon. The median positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity across diagnostic tools were 91%, 94%, 89%, and 86%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 82 diagnostic tools that most frequently were based on symptoms and physical examinations. Most diagnostic tools relied on a medical doctor/surgeon with access to laboratory values. The accuracy was high across the diagnostic tools.

Alvarado or RIPASA? Which one do you use to diagnose acute appendicitis?: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of lower abdominal pain, which is considered a general surgical emergency worldwide. The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and Alvarado score systems in diagnosing acute appendicitis.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at Shahid Sadoughi and Shahid Rahnemoon Hospitals in Yazd between September 2020 and February 2020. The statistical population consisted of all of the patients referred to the Accident and Emergency department with right iliac fossa (RIF) pain. All patients were scored using Alvarado and RIPASA scoring system. sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were computed by using SPSS statistical software. An receiver operating characteristic curve were plotted.

Results

In present study, one hundred suspected patients with appendicitis who underwent appendectomy were evaluated. The mean age of our study population was 25.2 ± 12.1 years, and the gender distribution was 57% males and 43% females. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of RIPASA were 86.6%, 66.7%, 92.2%, and 52.2%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of Alvarado score were 67.1%, 72.2%, 91.7%, 32.5%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was 68% for Alvarado score and 83% for RIPASA. The area under the curve for RIPASA (0.87) was more than that for Alvarado score (0.77).

Conclusion

The RIPASA score system had higher sensitivity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy than the Alvarado one. It is recommended for the physician and surgeon to evaluate patients with RIF pain using the RIPASA score.

DIALAPP: a prospective validation of a new diagnostic algorithm for acute appendicitis

Purpose

The management of patients with suspected appendicitis remains a challenge in daily clinical practice, and the optimal management algorithm is still being debated. Negative appendectomy rates (NAR) continue to range between 10 and 15%. This prospective study evaluated the accuracy of a diagnostic pathway in acute appendicitis using clinical risk stratification (Alvarado score), routine ultrasonography, gynecology consult for females, and selected CT after clinical reassessment.

Methods

Patients presenting with suspected appendicitis between November 2015 and September 2017 from age 18 years and above were included. Decision-making followed a clear management pathway. Patients were followed up for 6 months after discharge. The hypothesis was that the algorithm can reduce the NAR to a value of under 10%.

Results

A total of 183 patients were included. In 65 of 69 appendectomies, acute appendicitis was confirmed by histopathology, corresponding to a NAR of 5.8%. Notably, all 4 NAR appendectomies had other pathologies of the appendix. The perforation rate was 24.6%. Only 36 patients (19.7%) received a CT scan. The follow-up rate after 30 days achieved 69%, including no patients with missed appendicitis. The sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic pathway was 100% and 96.6%, respectively. The potential saving in costs can be as much as 19.8 million €/100,000 cases presenting with the suspicion of appendicitis.

Conclusion

The risk-stratified diagnostic algorithm yields a high diagnostic accuracy for patients with suspicion of appendicitis. Its implementation can safely reduce the NAR, simultaneously minimizing the use of CT scans and optimizing healthcare-related costs in the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02627781 (December 2015)

IMPROVED OUTCOMES WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY (ERAS) PATHWAY FOR PATIENTS UNDERGOING ELECTIVE COLORECTAL SURGERY IN THE PHILIPPINES

Objective

This study aims to evaluate surgical outcomes (i.e. length of stay, 30-day morbidity, mortality, reoperation, and readmission rates) with the use of the ERAS pathway, and determine its association with the rate of compliance to the different ERAS components.

Methodology

This was a prospective cohort of patients, who underwent the following elective procedures: stoma reversal (SR), colon resection (CR), and rectal resection (RR). The primary endpoint was to determine the association of compliance to an ERAS pathway and surgical outcomes. These were then compared to outcomes prior to the implementation of ERAS.

Results

A total of 267 patients were included in the study. The overall compliance to the ERAS component was 92% (SR:91.75%, CR:93.06%, RR:90.65%). There was an associated decrease in morbidity rates across all types of surgery, as compliance to ERAS increased. The average total LOS decreased in all groups but was only found to have statistical significance in SR (12.06 ± 6.67 vs 10.02 ± 5.43 days; p=0.002) and RR (19.85 ± 11.38 vs 16.85 ± 10.45 days; p=0.04) groups. Decreased postoperative LOS was noted in all groups. Morbidity rates were significantly higher after ERAS implementation, but reoperation and mortality rates were found to be similar.

Conclusion

Implementation of ERAS improved outcomes, particularly length of stay. Although an actual increase in morbidity was noted, that may be explained by the improved reporting and documentation that accompanied the implementation of the protocol, a decreased likelihood of developing complications is foreseen with increased compliance to ERAS.

Current opinions and practices for the management of acute appendicitis: an international survey

BACKGROUND

In recent decades the management of acute appendicitis has evolved significantly. Improved access to early imaging and better clinical scoring algorithms have resulted in less negative appendicectomy rates. In addition, non-operative management has become increasingly utilized. The aim of this study was to assess the variability of management of acute appendicitis globally.

METHODS

This was a multi-national targeted survey of general surgeons across 39 countries. A structured set of questions was utilized to delineate nuances between management styles of consultants and trainees. Opinions on the pathological diagnosis of appendicitis, acceptable negative appendicectomy rates, and the role of non-operative treatment of appendicitis (NOTA) were surveyed.

RESULTS

A total of 304 general surgeons responded to this survey, 42% of which were consultants/attendings. Sixty-nine percent advocated that a histologically normal appendix was the most appropriate definition of a negative appendicectomy, while 29% felt that anything other than inflammation, necrosis, gangrene, or perforation was more appropriate. Forty-three percent felt that negative appendicectomy rates should be less than 10%, with 41% reporting that their own negative appendicectomy rate was < 5%. Interestingly, only 17% reported routinely using NOTA for uncomplicated appendicitis, with one-fifth stating that they would undergo NOTA if they themselves had uncomplicated appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

This study represents the largest sampling of management strategies for acute appendicitis. It shows substantial global heterogeneity between clinicians regarding what constitutes a negative appendicectomy as well as the appropriateness of non-operative management.

Computed tomography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing acute appendicitis (appendicitis) based on clinical evaluation, blood testing, and urinalysis can be difficult. Therefore, in persons with suspected appendicitis, abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) is often used as an add-on test following the initial evaluation to reduce remaining diagnostic uncertainty. The aim of using CT is to assist the clinician in discriminating between persons who need surgery with appendicectomy and persons who do not.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective Our primary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of CT for diagnosing appendicitis in adults with suspected appendicitis. Secondary objectives Our secondary objectives were to compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced versus non-contrast-enhanced CT, to compare the accuracy of low-dose versus standard-dose CT, and to explore the influence of CT-scanner generation, radiologist experience, degree of clinical suspicion of appendicitis, and aspects of methodological quality on diagnostic accuracy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index until 16 June 2017. We also searched references lists. We did not exclude studies on the basis of language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective studies that compared results of CT versus outcomes of a reference standard in adults (> 14 years of age) with suspected appendicitis. We excluded studies recruiting only pregnant women; studies in persons with abdominal pain at any location and with no particular suspicion of appendicitis; studies in which all participants had undergone ultrasonography (US) before CT and the decision to perform CT depended on the US outcome; studies using a case-control design; studies with fewer than 10 participants; and studies that did not report the numbers of true-positives, false-positives, false-negatives, and true-negatives. Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected the data from each study and evaluated methodological quality according to the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy - Revised (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate random-effects model to obtain summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 64 studies including 71 separate study populations with a total of 10,280 participants (4583 with and 5697 without acute appendicitis). Estimates of sensitivity ranged from 0.72 to 1.0 and estimates of specificity ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 across the 71 study populations. Summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 0.96), and summary specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95). At the median prevalence of appendicitis (0.43), the probability of having appendicitis following a positive CT result was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.94), and the probability of having appendicitis following a negative CT result was 0.04 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05). In subgroup analyses according to contrast enhancement, summary sensitivity was higher for CT with intravenous contrast (0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.98), CT with rectal contrast (0.97, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.99), and CT with intravenous and oral contrast enhancement (0.96, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) than for unenhanced CT (0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.93). Summary sensitivity of CT with oral contrast enhancement (0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.94) and unenhanced CT was similar. Results show practically no differences in summary specificity, which varied from 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.95) to 0.95 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.98) between subgroups. Summary sensitivity for low-dose CT (0.94, 95% 0.90 to 0.97) was similar to summary sensitivity for standard-dose or unspecified-dose CT (0.95, 95% 0.93 to 0.96); summary specificity did not differ between low-dose and standard-dose or unspecified-dose CT. No studies had high methodological quality as evaluated by the QUADAS-2 tool. Major methodological problems were poor reference standards and partial verification primarily due to inadequate and incomplete follow-up in persons who did not have surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity and specificity of CT for diagnosing appendicitis in adults are high. Unenhanced standard-dose CT appears to have lower sensitivity than standard-dose CT with intravenous, rectal, or oral and intravenous contrast enhancement. Use of different types of contrast enhancement or no enhancement does not appear to affect specificity. Differences in sensitivity and specificity between low-dose and standard-dose CT appear to be negligible. The results of this review should be interpreted with caution for two reasons. First, these results are based on studies of low methodological quality. Second, the comparisons between types of contrast enhancement and radiation dose may be unreliable because they are based on indirect comparisons that may be confounded by other factors.

Suspected appendicitis pathway continues to lower CT rates in children two years after implementation

BACKGROUND

We implemented a protocol to evaluate pediatric patients with suspected appendicitis using ultrasound as the initial imaging modality. CT utilization rates and diagnostic accuracy were evaluated two years after pathway implementation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study of patients <18 years evaluated for suspected appendicitis. CT rates were compared before and after implementation of the protocol, and monthly CT rates were calculated to assess trends in CT utilization.

RESULTS

CT use decreased significantly following pathway implementation from 94.2% (130/138) to 27.5% (78/284; p < 0.001). Linear regression of monthly CT utilization demonstrated that CT rates continued to trend down two years after pathway implementation. Adherence to the pathway was 89.8% (255/284). Negative appendectomy rate was 2.4% (2/85) in the post-pathway period.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to a pathway designed to evaluate pediatric patients with suspected appendicitis using ultrasound as the primary imaging modality has led to a sustained decrease in CT use without compromising diagnostic accuracy.

[The use of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis]

AIM

To present the use of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted in 139 patients who were hospitalized with suspected acute appendicitis. However, the diagnosis was not clearly confirmed by clinical and ultrasonic data.

RESULTS

Computed tomography confirmed/rejected presumptive diagnosis in 90.8% of patients. It was concluded that CT has high diagnostic accuracy to confirm acute appendicitis.

Diagnosis of pain in the right iliac fossa. A new diagnostic score based on Decision-Tree and Artificial Neural Network Methods

INTRODUCTION

Pain in the right iliac fossa (RIF) continues to pose diagnostic challenges. The objective of this study is the development of a RIF pain diagnosis model based on classification trees of type CHAID (Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detection) and on an artificial neural network (ANN).

METHODS

Prospective study of 252 patients who visited the hospital due to RIF pain. Demographic, clinical, physical examination and analytical data were registered. Patients were classified into 4 groups: NsP (nonspecific RIFP group), AA (acute appendicitis), NIRIF (RIF pain with no inflammation) and IRIF (RIF pain with inflammation). A CHAID-type classification tree model and an ANN were constructed. The classic models (Alvarado [ALS], Appendicitis Inflammatory Response [AIR] and Fenyö-Linberg [FLS]) were also evaluated. Discrimination was assessed using ROC curves (AUC [95% CI]) and the correct classification rate (CCR).

RESULTS

53% were men. Mean age 33.3±16 years. The largest group was the NsP (45%), AA (37%), NRIF (12%) and IRIF (6%). The analytical model results were: ALS (0.82 [0.76-0.87]), AIR (0.83 [0.77-0.88]) and FLS (0.88 [0.84-0.92]). CHAID determined 10 decision groups: 3 with high probability for NsP, 3 high for AA and 4 special groups with no predominant diagnosis. CCR of ANN and CHAID were 75% and 74.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodology based on CHAID-type classification trees establishes a diagnostic model based on four pain groups in RIF and generates decision rules that can help us in the diagnosis of processes with RIF pain.

Predictors of Positive CT Yield in Pediatric Patients With Nontraumatic Abdominal Pain

OBJECTIVE

The use of abdominal computed tomography (ACT) for nontraumatic abdominal pain in the pediatric emergency department is increasing to a remarkable extent, and every effort should be made to select patients who would benefit from ACT. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and laboratory predictors of positive CT yield in pediatric patients with nontraumatic abdominal pain.

METHODS

The medical records of 739 pediatric patients who, between January 2009 and February 2014, underwent ACT for nontraumatic abdominal pain at the emergency department were reviewed retrospectively. These patients were divided into 2 groups: a right lower quadrant (RLQ) pain group and a non-RLQ pain group. The radiology reports were reviewed to determine ACT diagnoses. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to elicit independent predictors of positive ACT yield. Equations predicting the probability of positive ACT diagnosis were deduced from the regression equation in both groups.

RESULTS

In the RLQ pain group, the most frequent ACT diagnosis was acute appendicitis, and in the non-RLQ pain group, enteritis was the most frequent diagnosis. In the RLQ pain group, sex, leukocytosis, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and elevated C-reactive protein were significant independent predictors for positive ACT diagnosis. The number of synchronous predictor was significantly related to the proportion of positive ACT diagnosis. In the non-RLQ pain group, leukocytosis was the only significant predictor in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors predicting positive CT yield were sex, leukocytosis, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and elevated C-reactive protein in the RLQ pain group and leukocytosis in the non-RLQ pain group.

Evaluation of modified Alvarado scoring system and RIPASA scoring system as diagnostic tools of acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical condition presented in emergency departments worldwide. Clinical scoring systems, such as the Alvarado and modified Alvarado scoring systems, were developed with the goal of reducing the negative appendectomy rate to 5%-10%. The Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) scoring system was established in 2008 specifically for Asian populations. The aim of this study was to compare the modified Alvarado with the RIPASA scoring system in Kuwait population.

METHODS

This study included 180 patients who underwent appendectomies and were documented as having "acute appendicitis" or "abdominal pain" in the operating theatre logbook (unit B) from November 2014 to March 2016. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, predicted negative appendectomy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems were derived using SPSS statistical software.

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients were included in this study according to our criteria. The cut-off threshold point of the modified Alvarado score was set at 7.0, which yielded a sensitivity of 82.8% and a specificity of 56%. The PPV was 89.3% and the NPV was 42.4%. The cut-off threshold point of the RIPASA score was set at 7.5, which yielded a 94.5% sensitivity and an 88% specificity. The PPV was 97.2% and the NPV was 78.5%. The predicted negative appendectomy rates were 10.7% and 2.2% for the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems, respectively. The negative appendectomy rate decreased significantly, from 18.4% to 10.7% for the modified Alvarado, and to 2.2% for the RIPASA scoring system, which was a significant difference (P<0.001) for both scoring systems.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this study, the RIPASA score is a simple scoring system with better sensitivity and specificity than the modified Alvarado scoring system in Asian populations. It consists of 14 clinical parameters that can be obtained from a good patient history, clinical examination and laboratory investigations. The RIPASA scoring system is more accurate and specific than the modified Alvarado scoring system for Kuwait population.

Variation in advanced imaging for pediatric patients with abdominal pain discharged from the ED

BACKGROUND

Pediatric abdominal pain visits to emergency departments (ED) are common. The objectives of this study are to assess variation in imaging (ultrasound ±computed tomography [CT]) and factors associated with isolated CT use.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of ED visits for pediatric abdominal pain resulting in discharge from 16 regional EDs from 2007 to 2013. Primary outcome was ultrasound or CT imaging. Secondary outcome was isolated CT use. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate patient- and hospital-level covariates associated with imaging.

RESULTS

Of the 21 152 visits, imaging was performed in 29.7%, and isolated CT in 13.4% of visits. In multivariable analysis, black patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-0.5) and Medicaid (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7) had lower odds of advanced imaging compared with white patients and private insurance, respectively. General EDs were less likely to perform imaging (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7) compared with the pediatric ED; however, for visits with imaging, 3.5% of visits to the pediatric ED compared with 76% of those to general EDs included an isolated CT (P<.001). Low pediatric volume (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2) and rural (OR,1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5) EDs had higher odds of isolated CT use, compared with higher pediatric volumes and nonrural EDs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There are racial and insurance disparities in imaging for pediatric abdominal pain. General EDs are less likely than pediatric EDs to use imaging, but more likely to use isolated CT. Strategies are needed to minimize disparities and improve the use of "ultrasound first."

Acute Appendicitis: Use of Clinical and CT Findings for Modeling Hospital Resource Utilization

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate associations between baseline CT findings in suspected acute appendicitis and subsequent hospital resource utilization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred thirty-eight patients (76 male and 62 female patients; mean [± SD] age, 40 ± 21 years) who were admitted for suspected acute appendicitis and underwent baseline CT were included. A single radiologist reviewed CT examinations for appendiceal-related findings. Linear and logistic regressions were performed to identify independent predictors of payer and hospital resource utilization. Combined performance of identified independent factors for predicting outcomes was determined.

RESULTS

Greater age, lower Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), lesser appendiceal wall thickness, absence of loculated fluid collection, and absence of periappendiceal fluid were significant independent predictors of inpatient surgery (joint sensitivity, 92.7%; specificity, 65.8%). Smaller appendiceal diameter, absence of periappendiceal fluid, and laparoscopic surgery were significant independent predictors of same-day discharge (joint sensitivity, 79.1%; specificity, 64.2%). Greater CCI, greater wall thickness, and presence of periappendiceal fluid were significant independent predictors of repeat abdominopelvic CT (joint sensitivity, 82.5%; specificity, 68.1%). Presence of an appendicolith was the only significant predictor of repeat emergency department visit within 30 days (sensitivity, 61.2%; specificity, 68.8%) and the only significant predictor of repeat inpatient admission within 30 days (sensitivity, 63.6%; specificity, 68.5%). Greater appendiceal diameter and presence of free air were significant predictors of inpatient costs, and predicted costs were as follows: $8047 + ($745 × appendiceal diameter) if free air was absent; and $-39,261 + ($4426 × appendiceal diameter) if free air was present. However, costs were poorly predicted when greater than $45,000. Sex, WBC count, and payer category were not independent predictors, relative to CT findings, of any outcome.

CONCLUSION

Admission CT findings serve as independent predictors of hospital resource utilization in suspected acute appendicitis.

A Comparative Study of RIPASA Score and ALVARADO Score in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Different techniques have been devised to assist in equivocal cases in attempts to decrease negative appendicectomy rates. A number of scoring systems have been used for aiding in early diagnosis of acute appendicitis and its prompt management of which Alvarado score is the most popular. The accuracy of Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is disappointingly low in Asian population and RIPASA scoring has been designed for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the Asian population. So we prospectively applied and compared Alvarado and RIPASA score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in Indian population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared prospectively RIPASA and Alvarado scoring system by applying them to 206 patients. Both scores were calculated for patients who presented with right iliac fossa pain during the study period. Depending on clinical judgment appendicectomy was done. Post operative histopathology report was correlated with the scores. A score of 7.5 is the optimal cut off threshold for RIPASA and 7 for Alvarado scoring system. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) for RIPASA & Alvarado system was done.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of RIPASA score were 96.2% and 90.5% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Alvarado score were 58.9% and 85.7% respectively. RIPASA score correctly classified 96 percent of all patients confirmed with histological acute appendicitis to the high probability group (RIPASA score greater than 7.5) compared with 58.9% with Alvarado score (Alvarado score greater than 7.0; p-value less than 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RIPASA scoring system is more convenient, accurate, and specific scoring system for Indian population than Alvarado scoring system.

Increasing utilization of abdominal CT in the Emergency Department of a secondary care center: does it produce better outcomes in caring for pediatric surgical patients?

PURPOSE

The use of abdominal computed tomography (ACT) utilization is increasing to a remarkable extent in the pediatric Emergency Department (ED), but the clinical benefit of increased use of ACT for pediatric surgical patients remains uncertain.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to investigate if, for patients who had visited pediatric ED during the last 5 years, increasing utilization of ACT would increase the detection rate of acute appendicitis, increase the detection rate of surgical conditions other than appendicitis, and decrease the hospital admission rate for surgical conditions.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 37,918 ED visits; of these, 3,274 (8.6%) were for abdominal pain, 844 (2.2%) had ACT performed. The annual proportional increase of the ACT was statistically significant (1.56% to 2.46%, P = 0.00), but the detection rate of acute appendicitis (3.3% to 5.1%) or other surgical conditions (1.7% to 2.8%) showed no statistically significant changes. Hospital admission rates (5.6% to 6.8%) also showed no significant changes during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Increasing utilization of ACT does not lead to the improved outcomes in caring for pediatric surgical patients visiting the pediatric ED. Careful evaluation for the indication for ACT is needed in the pediatric ED.

A simple algorithm reduces computed tomography use in the diagnosis of appendicitis in children

BACKGROUND

A diagnostic algorithm for appendicitis in children was created to reduce computed tomography (CT) use owing to the risk of cancer from radiation exposure and cost of CT. This study evaluates the impact of the algorithm on CT use and diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis.

METHODS

Patients ≤18 years who underwent appendectomy for suspected appendicitis after presenting to the emergency department for 2 years before and 3 years after algorithm implementation were identified. Clinical characteristics and outcomes, including use of CT and negative appendectomy rate, were compared between the pre- and post-implementation periods. Multivariable analysis was used to determine the impact of CT on negative appendectomy.

RESULTS

We identified 331 patients-41% in the pre- and 59% in the post-implementation period. CT utilization decreased from 39% to 18% (P < .001) after implementation. The negative appendectomy rate increased from 9% to 11% (P = .59). Use of CT did not impact the risk of negative appendectomy (P = .64).

CONCLUSION

Utilization of CT was significantly reduced after implementation of a diagnostic algorithm for appendicitis without impacting diagnostic accuracy. Given the concern for increased risk of cancer after CT, these results support use of an algorithm in children with suspected appendicitis.

Treatment options of inflammatory appendiceal masses in adults

At present, the treatment of choice for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in adults continues to be surgical. The inflammation in acute appendicitis may sometimes be enclosed by the patient’s own defense mechanisms, by the formation of an inflammatory phlegmon or a circumscribed abscess. The management of these patients is controversial. Immediate appendectomy may be technically demanding. The exploration often ends up in an ileocecal resection or a right-sided hemicolectomy. Recently, the conditions for conservative management of these patients have changed due to the development of computed tomography and ultrasound, which has improved the diagnosis of enclosed inflammation and made drainage of intra-abdominal abscesses easier. New efficient antibiotics have also given new opportunities for nonsurgical treatment of complicated appendicitis. The traditional management of these patients is nonsurgical treatment followed by interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence. The need for interval appendectomy after successful nonsurgical treatment has recently been questioned because the risk of recurrence is relatively small. After successful nonsurgical treatment of an appendiceal mass, the true diagnosis is uncertain in some cases and an underlying diagnosis of cancer or Crohn’s disease may be delayed. This report aims at reviewing the treatment options of patients with enclosed appendiceal inflammation, with emphasis on the success rate of nonsurgical treatment, the need for drainage of abscesses, the risk of undetected serious disease, and the need for interval appendectomy to prevent recurrence.

Use of care paths to improve patient management

The purpose of this special issue of Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics is to present an evidence-based system to guide the physical therapy management of patients in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). Two systematic guides to patient management will be presented. The first is a care path intended primarily for use by physical therapists, and the second is a care path for families of infants being cared for in the NICU. In this article, background information on the concept of using care paths for clinical management is presented, followed by a general description of the two care paths for use in the NICU. Subsequent articles describe physical therapy practice in the context of the NICU team approach to care for medically fragile infants with more detail on use of the two care paths and the evidence supporting their contents.

Negative appendicectomy rate as a quality metric in the management of appendicitis: impact of computed tomography, Alvarado score and the definition of negative appendicectomy

INTRODUCTION

The negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) is a quality metric in the management of appendicitis. While computed tomography (CT) has been associated with a low NAR, Alvarado scoring produces an acceptable NAR. The definition of negative appendicectomy may affect the NAR. This study examined the impact of CT, Alvarado score and definition on the NAR.

METHODS

The charts of 1,306 emergency appendicectomy patients from 1996 to 2010 were reviewed. Three five-year cohorts were created (Cohort A: 1996-2000, Cohort B: 2001-2005, Cohort C: 2006-2010) and the NAR was calculated for each cohort using two definitions of negative appendicectomy: absence of inflammation (NAR-STD) and absence of intramural neutrophils (NAR-STR). NAR-STD was correlated to the CT rate for Cohorts B and C and also to Alvarado score for Cohort C.

RESULTS

When the definition of negative appendicectomy was changed, the NAR rose from 9.2% to 15.8% (p=0.0097) for Cohort A, from 2.8% to 8.6% (p=0.0180) for Cohort B (CT rate: 80.6%) and from 3.0% to 6.7% (p=0.0255) for Cohort C (CT rate: 92.4%). The introduction of CT lowered NAR-STD from 1996-2000 (9.2%) to 2001-2010 (2.9%) but increasing the CT rate from 2001-2010 had no impact on the NAR. The positive predictive value for Alvarado score (98.60%) and CT (99.03%) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The definition of a negative appendicectomy determines the NAR. CT reduces the NAR regardless of definition but routine CT is unnecessary for male patients with positive Alvarado scores. Early/mild appendicitis may resolve without surgery and CT may contribute to unnecessary surgery. Alvarado scoring allows selective use of CT in suspected appendicitis.

The negative appendectomy rate: who benefits from preoperative CT?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to determine the negative appendectomy rates of patients who did and did not undergo preoperative CT and to determine, more specifically, whether men benefit from preoperative CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified 512 patients who had a nonincidental appendectomy between July 1, 2002, and June 30, 2007. Pathology records were compared with a radiology records search to determine which patients underwent preoperative CT. Proportions of patients were compared between groups using the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Of 512 patients who had a nonincidental appendectomy, 465 (91%) underwent preoperative CT, and 47 (9%) underwent appendectomy only on the basis of clinical findings. Overall, 22 of 465 patients (4.7%) who underwent preoperative CT had a negative appendectomy compared with six of 47 patients who did not undergo preoperative imaging (negative appendectomy rate, 12.7%; p = 0.03). Among men, six of 237 (2.5%) with preoperative CT had a negative appendectomy, versus five of 42 without imaging (negative appendectomy rate, 11.9%; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The negative appendectomy rate was decreased for adult patients who underwent preoperative CT compared with patients who did not undergo preoperative imaging. Although most prior studies have suggested that CT is efficacious only in decreasing the negative appendectomy rate among women, we found that men benefit from CT as well.

Evaluation of a clinical pathway to improve colorectal cancer outcomes

The aims of this preintervention and postintervention study were to monitor and evaluate the clinical pathway (CP) for colorectal cancer (CRC) over a 5-year period and to compare 2 groups of patients (before and after the intervention) with regard to different variables of effectiveness. Group I comprised 68 patients who underwent planned surgery between January 2002 and January 2003. Group II comprised a sample of 202 patients who underwent surgery between January 2004 and December 2008. No significant differences were found in the majority of the parameters measured: postoperative stay, compliance with antibiotic prophylaxis, compliance with the staging study, mortality, rate of infection, and reoperations. The mean length of stay (±standard deviation) for patients without complications was reduced significantly (9.2 ± 3.6 in group I versus 7.7 ± 1.7 in group II, P = .031). The CP for CRC did not achieve most of the objectives for which it was designed.

Consensus conference on laparoscopic appendectomy: development of guidelines

AIM

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is not yet unanimously considered the gold standard treatment for appendicitis, despite the increasing use of advanced laparoscopic operations and the high incidence of the disease.

METHOD

Due to the results of an audit which classified LA as widespread in Italy, a Consensus Conference was organized, in order to give evidence-based answers to the most debated problems regarding the operation. After researching the literature, a panel of 20 experts were selected and interviewed on hot topics; a subsequent discussion using the Delphi methodology was utilized in the course of the consensus conference and submitted to the evaluation of an audience of surgeons.

RESULTS

Checkpoint statements were formulated whenever an agreement was reached. A level of evidence was then assigned to single statements and the process revised by two external reviewers.

CONCLUSION

Consensus development guidelines are herein reported and regard diagnostic pathway, diagnostic laparoscopy, indications, behaviour in case of innocent appendix, technical aspects, learning curve; however, some questions remain unsolved due to the lack of evidence.

Impact of computed tomography of the abdomen on clinical outcomes in patients with acute right lower quadrant pain: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical evaluation alone is still considered adequate by many clinicians who treat patients with appendicitis. The impact of computed tomography (CT) on clinical outcomes remains unclear, and there is no consensus regarding the appropriate use of CT in these patients. We sought to evaluate the impact of abdominal CT on the clinical outcomes of patients presenting with suspected appendicitis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that examined clinical outcomes related to the use of abdominal CT in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Inclusion criteria were studies of adult patients with suspected appendicitis that evaluated the impact of abdominal CT on negative appendectomy rates, perforation rates or time to surgery. Two independent investigators reviewed all titles and abstracts and extracted data from 28 full-text articles. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.0.10 software.

RESULTS

The negative appendectomy rate was 8.7% when using CT compared with 16.7% when using clinical evaluation alone (p < 0.001). There was also a significantly lower negative appendectomy rate during the CT era compared with the pre-CT era (10.0% v. 21.5%, p < 0.001). Time to surgery was evaluated in 10 of the 28 studies, 5 of which demonstrated a significant increase in the time to surgery with the use of CT. Appendiceal perforation rates were unchanged by the use of CT (23.4% in the CT group v. 16.7% in the clinical evaluation group, p = 0.15). Similarly, the perforation rate during the CT era was not significantly different than that during the pre-CT era (20.0% v. 19.6%, p = 0.74).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the use of preoperative abdominal CT is associated with lower negative appendectomy rates. The use of CT in the absence of an expedited imaging protocol may delay surgery, but this delay is not associated with increased appendiceal perforation rates. Routine CT in all patients presenting with suspected appendicitis could reduce the rate of unnecessary surgery without increasing morbidity.

O knowledge, where art thou? Evidence and suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Much effort goes into developing and publishing guidelines which physicians fail to implement. We feel that major discrepancies still exist between theory and reality and that the translational approach to this aspect of medical care has not yet established itself. We therefore decided to investigate in an exemplary audit how liberally inappropriate imaging is used in our emergency department (ED) to rule out acute appendicitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Our electronic medical record ED database 'Qualicare' (http://www.qualidoc.ch) was searched using the 'appendicitis' sub data base. The frequency and accuracy of abdominal imaging was determined in patients with clinically suspected appendicitis on admission over a 5-year period at a university hospital emergency unit.

RESULTS

In total, 272 (41.2%) of the 577 patients were male and 305 (46.3%) were female. The attending physicians ordered abdominal X-rays in 133 patients, abdominal ultrasounds in 319, and abdominal computerized tomography (CT) scans in 93 patients. 125 patients underwent more than one imaging procedure. In all, 85/125 patients received a combination of X-rays, ultrasound and CT scanning!

DISCUSSION

Physicians are often insecure about indications for surgery and therefore order useless imaging procedures. The reliability of such procedures in excluding acute appendicitis is limited, which was confirmed by our results. Although evidence-based medicine guidelines exist, they are neglected for many reasons. Future academic efforts should therefore focus more on knowledge translation and the implementation of existing knowledge by heightening awareness, rather than on simply creating new guidelines.

Diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast computed tomography for appendicitis in adults: a systematic review

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We seek to determine the diagnostic test characteristics of noncontrast computed tomography (CT) for appendicitis in the adult emergency department (ED) population.

METHODS

We conducted a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the bibliographies of previous systematic reviews. Included studies assessed the diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast CT for acute appendicitis in adults by using the final diagnosis at surgery or follow-up at a minimum of 2 weeks as the reference standard. Studies were included only if the CT was completed using a multislice helical scanner. Two authors independently conducted the relevance screen of titles and abstracts, selected studies for the final inclusion, extracted data, and assessed study quality. Consensus was reached by conference, and any disagreements were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Unenhanced CT test performance was assessed with summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, with independently pooled sensitivity and specificity values across studies.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1,258 publications; 7 studies met the inclusion criteria and provided a sample of 1,060 patients. The included studies were of high methodological quality with respect to appropriate patient spectrum and reference standard. Our pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity were 92.7% (95% confidence interval 89.5% to 95.0%) and 96.1% (95% confidence interval 94.2% to 97.5%), respectively; the positive likelihood ratio=24 and the negative likelihood ratio=0.08.

CONCLUSION

We found the diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the adult population to be adequate for clinical decisionmaking in the ED setting.

CT scans and acute appendicitis: a five-year analysis from a rural teaching hospital

INTRODUCTION

Studies examining the relationship between computed tomography (CT) scans and appendiceal perforation have largely been conducted in urban centers. The present study sought to evaluate this relationship in a rural hospital.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

This is a retrospective analysis of 445 patients who underwent appendectomies from January 2000 to June 2005 at a rural teaching hospital.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-five patients were analyzed in two groups; those who underwent CT scans (N = 245) and those who did not (N = 200). Patients undergoing CT scans were significantly older (median age 38 vs. 22 years, P < 0.0001), were more likely to have perforated appendicitis (P 0.001), were less likely to undergo a negative appendectomy (P = 0.003), and had a significantly longer length of stay than those who did not (P 0.009). Analysis by gender showed that perforation rates continued to be significantly higher in males undergoing CT scans (P 0.004). To examine the possibility that sicker patients were more likely to receive CT scans and also be found to have perforated appendicitis, a sensitivity analysis was performed. Patients showing perforated appendicitis on initial CT scans were excluded and the analysis was repeated. The difference in perforation rates continued to remain significant (P 0.037).

CONCLUSION

Males undergoing CT scans are significantly more likely to have perforated appendicitis. A protocol-driven rational approach to CT evaluation of suspected appendicitis may lower perforation rates, especially in males.

The appendix on CT

Appendicitis can be a difficult clinical diagnosis to make. A negative appendicectomy rate of 20% has traditionally been accepted as the consequences of appendiceal perforation can be grave. Cross-sectional imaging is increasingly being employed in the investigation of adults with suspected appendicitis. This review will demonstrate the appearance of the normal appendix on computed tomography (CT) and its appearance in a range of inflammatory and neoplastic processes including appendicitis, Crohn's disease, infections, and benign and malignant tumours.

Computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: definitive or detrimental?

OBJECTIVES

Utilization of computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with presumed appendicitis was evaluated at a single institution to determine the sensitivity of this diagnostic test and its effect on clinical outcome.

METHODS

Adult patients (age > 17 years) with appendicitis were identified from hospital records. Findings at surgery, including the incidence of perforation, were correlated with imaging results.

RESULTS

During a 3-year period, 411 patients underwent appendectomy for presumed acute appendicitis at our institution. Of these patients, 256 (62%) underwent preoperative CT, and the remaining 155 (38%) patients did not have imaging before the surgery. The time interval between arrival in the emergency room to time in the operating room was longer for patients who had preoperative imaging (8.2 +/- 0.3 h) compared to those who did not (5.1 +/- 0.2 h, p < 0.001). Moreover, this possible delay in intervention was associated with a higher rate of appendiceal perforation in the CT group (17 versus 8%, p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative CT scanning in patients with presumed appendicitis should be used selectively as widespread utilization may adversely affect outcomes. The potential negative impact of CT imaging includes a delay in operative intervention and a potentially higher perforation rate.

Abdominal CT Scanning in Reproductive-Age Women with Right Lower Quadrant Abdominal Pain: Does Its Use Reduce Negative Appendectomy Rates and Healthcare Costs?

Although acute appendicitis is the most frequent cause of the acute abdomen in the United States, its accurate diagnosis in reproductive-age women remains difficult. Problems in making the diagnosis are evidenced by negative appendectomy rates in this group of 20 per cent to 45 per cent. Abdominal CT scanning has been used in diagnosing acute appendicitis, but its reliability and usefulness remains controversial. There is concern that the use of CT scanning to make this diagnosis leads to increased and unwarranted healthcare charges and costs. The purpose of our study is to determine if abdominal CT scanning is an effective test in making the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in reproductive-age women (age, 16–49 years) with right lower quadrant abdominal pain and to determine if its use is cost-effective. From January 2003 to December 2006, 439 patients were identified from our academic surgical database and confirmed by chart review as undergoing an appendectomy with a pre- or postoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Data, including age, presence and results of preoperative abdominal CT scans, operative findings, and pathology reports were reviewed. Comparison of patients receiving a preoperative CT scan with those who did not was performed using chi-squared analysis. In the subgroup of reproductive-age women, there was a significant difference in negative appendectomy rates of 17 per cent in the group that received abdominal CT scans versus 42 per cent in the group that did not ( P < 0.038). After accounting for the patient and insurance company costs, abdominal CT scan savings averaged $1412 per patient. Abdominal CT scanning is a reliable, useful, and cost-effective test for evaluating right lower quadrant abdominal pain and making the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in reproductive-age women.