Diagnostic Usefulness of Low-Dose Nonenhanced Computed Tomography With Coronal Reformations in Patients With Suspected Acute Appendicitis: A Comparison With Standard-Dose Computed Tomography

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Right Lower Quadrant Pain: 2022 Update

This document focuses on imaging in the adult and pregnant populations with right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal pain, including patients with fever and leukocytosis. Appendicitis remains the most common surgical pathology responsible for RLQ abdominal pain in the United States. Other causes of RLQ pain include right colonic diverticulitis, ureteral stone, and infectious enterocolitis. Appropriate imaging in the diagnosis of appendicitis has resulted in decreased negative appendectomy rate from as high as 25% to approximately 1% to 3%. Contrast-enhanced CT remains the primary and most appropriate imaging modality to evaluate this patient population. MRI is approaching CT in sensitivity and specificity as this technology becomes more widely available and utilization increases. Unenhanced MRI and ultrasound remain the diagnostic procedures of choice in the pregnant patient. MRI and ultrasound continue to perform best in the hands of the experts. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer-reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer-reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

The Accuracy of Low-dose Computed Tomography Protocol in Patients With Suspected Acute Appendicitis: The OPTICAP Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced low-dose computed tomography (CT) accomplished in the OPTICAP trial phantom phase to standard CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of CT as the gold standard in diagnosing acute appendicitis has raised concerns regarding radiation exposure. Unenhanced low-dose CT protocols have shown similar diagnostic accuracy with standard CT for diagnosing appendicitis. To our knowledge, there are no other trials in which the same patient with suspected acute appendicitis underwent both standard and low-dose CT allowing interpatient comparison.

METHODS

OPTICAP is an interpatient protocol sequence randomized noninferiority single-center trial performed at Turku University Hospital between November, 2015 and August, 2016. Sixty patients with suspected acute appendicitis and body mass index <30 kg/m were enrolled to undergo both standard and low-dose contrast enhanced CT scans, which were categorized as normal, uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis by 2 radiologists in blinded manner. All patients with CT confirmed appendicitis underwent appendectomy to obtain histopathology.

RESULTS

The low-dose protocol was not inferior to standard protocol in terms of diagnostic accuracy; 79% [95% confidence interval (CI) 66%-89%) accurate diagnosis in low-dose and 80% (95% CI 67%-90%) in standard CT by primary radiologist. Accuracy to categorize appendicitis severity was 79% for both protocols. The mean radiation dose of low-dose CT was significantly lower compared with standard CT (3.33 and 4.44 mSv, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced low-dose CT was not inferior to standard CT in diagnosing acute appendicitis or distinguishing between uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis in patients with a high likelihood of acute appendicitis. Low-dose CT enabled significant radiation dose reduction.

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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Right Lower Quadrant Pain-Suspected Appendicitis

Appendicitis remains the most common surgical pathology responsible for right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal pain presenting to emergency departments in the United States, where the incidence continues to increase. Appropriate imaging in the diagnosis of appendicitis has resulted in decreased negative appendectomy rate from as high as 25% to approximately 1% to 3%. Contrast-enhanced CT remains the primary and most appropriate imaging modality to evaluate this patient population. MRI is approaching CT in sensitivity and specificity as this technology becomes more widely available and utilization increases. Unenhanced MRI and ultrasound remain the diagnostic procedures of choice in the pregnant patient. MRI and ultrasound continue to perform best in the hands of experts. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

The diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis in paediatric and adult patients: A systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out through to 10 January 2017. Studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis in paediatric and adult patients were selected. Pooled summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using hierarchical logistic regression modelling. Meta-regression was performed.

RESULTS

Fourteen original articles with a total of 3,262 patients were included. For all studies using reduced-dose CT, the summary sensitivity was 96 % (95 % CI 93-98) with a summary specificity of 94 % (95 % CI 92-95). For the 11 studies providing a head-to-head comparison between reduced-dose CT and standard-dose CT, reduced-dose CT demonstrated a comparable summary sensitivity of 96 % (95 % CI 91-98) and specificity of 94 % (95 % CI 93-96) without any significant differences (p=.41). In meta-regression, there were no significant factors affecting the heterogeneity. The median effective radiation dose of the reduced-dose CT was 1.8 mSv (1.46-4.16 mSv), which was a 78 % reduction in effective radiation dose compared to the standard-dose CT.

CONCLUSION

Reduced-dose CT shows excellent diagnostic performance for suspected appendicitis.

KEY POINTS

• Reduced-dose CT shows excellent diagnostic performance for evaluating suspected appendicitis. • Reduced-dose CT has a comparable diagnostic performance to standard-dose CT. • Median effective radiation dose of reduced-dose CT was 1.8 mSv (1.46-4.16). • Reduced-dose CT achieved a 78 % dose reduction compared to standard-dose CT.

Radiation dose reduction in multidetector CT in fracture evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether multidetector CT with low-dose radiation (low-dose CT) of joints can be useful when evaluating fractures.

METHODS

Our study included CT scans of 398 patients, 103 shoulder cases, 109 wrist cases, 98 pelvis cases and 88 ankle cases. There were 191 females and 207 males. The low-dose CTs were performed using identical voltage and parameters with the exception of decreased (half of standard dose) tube current. Low-dose and standard-dose images were compared with regards to objective image quality, subjective evaluation of image quality and diagnostic performance for the fractures.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference of image noise between standard-dose CT and low-dose CT in every joint (p > 0.05). Each mean value of subjective score did not show significant difference according to the dosage of the CT scan. There were no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity (96-100%), specificity (95.2-100%) or accuracy (97.9-100%) between standard-dose CT and low-dose CT (p values, 0.1336-1.000).

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of extremities for fractures using low-dose CT can reduce radiation exposure by about 50% compared with standard-dose CT without affecting image quality or diagnostic performance. Advances in knowledge: Low-dose CT of the extremities (shoulder, pelvis, ankle and wrist) can reduce radiation dose by about 50% compared with standard-dose CT and does not significantly affect image quality or diagnostic performance in fracture detection.

Comparison of Low- and Standard-Dose CT for the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis was performed to compare low-dose CT and standard-dose CT in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an emphasis on diagnostic value.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search for articles published through June 2016 was performed to identify studies that compared low-dose CT with standard-dose CT for the evaluation of patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. Meta-regression was used to perform statistical comparisons of low-dose CT and standard-dose CT.

RESULTS

Of 154 studies, nine studies investigating a total of 2957 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of low-dose CT were 96.25% (95% CI, 91.88-98.31%) and 93.22% (95% CI, 88.75-96.00%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of standard-dose CT were 96.40% (95% CI, 93.55-98.02%) and 92.17% (95% CI, 88.24-94.86%), respectively. In a joint model estimation of meta-regression, lowand standard-dose CT did not show a statistically significant difference (p = 0.71). Both lowand standard-dose CT seem to be characterized by high positive and negative predictive values across a broad spectrum of pretest probabilities for acute appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose CT is highly effective for the diagnosis of suspected appendicitis and can be considered a valid alternative first-line imaging test that reduces the potential risk of exposure to ionizing radiation.