Article

Sonography in the Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis Are Negative Sonographic Findings Good Enough?

Department of Radiology, Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Journal of ultrasound in medicine: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.53). 12/2010; 29(12):1749-55.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to evaluate the negative predictive value (NPV) of sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.
Right lower quadrant sonograms of 193 patients (158 female and 35 male; age range, 3-20 years) with suspected acute appendicitis over a 1-year period were retrospectively reviewed. Sonographic findings were graded on a 5-point scale, ranging from a normal appendix identified (grade 1) to frankly acute appendicitis (grade 5). Sonographic findings were compared with subsequent computed tomographic (CT), surgical, and pathologic findings. The diagnostic accuracy of sonography was assessed considering surgical findings and clinical follow-up as reference standards.
Forty-nine patients (25.4%) had appendicitis on sonography, and 144 (74.6%) had negative sonographic findings. Computed tomographic scans were obtained in 51 patients (26.4%) within 4 days after sonography. These included 39 patients with negative and 12 with positive sonographic findings. Computed tomography changed the sonographic diagnosis in 10 patients: from negative to positive in 3 cases and positive to negative in 7. Forty-three patients (22.2%) underwent surgery. The surgical findings were positive for appendicitis in 37 (86%) of the 43 patients who had surgery. Patients with negative sonographic findings who, to our knowledge, did not have subsequent CT scans or surgery were considered to have negative findings for appendicitis. Seven patients with negative sonographic findings underwent surgery and had appendicitis; therefore, 137 of 144 patients with negative sonographic findings did not have appendicitis. On the basis of these numbers, the NPV was 95.1%.
Sonography has a high NPV and should be considered as a reasonable screening tool in the evaluation of acute appendicitis. Further imaging could be performed if clinical signs and symptoms worsen.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Leann E Linam, Jul 04, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
238 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purposes of this study were to revisit the utility of ultrasonography (USG) as a primary imaging modality in acute appendicitis (AA) and to establish the role of CT scan as a second-line/problem-solving modality. All cases of suspected AA were referred for urgent USG. USG was done with standard protocol for appendicitis. Limited computed tomographic (CT) scan [NCCT ± CECT (IV contrast only)] was done for the lower abdomen and pelvis where sonographic findings were equivocal. One hundred and twenty-one patients were referred for USG for suspected appendicitis. Eight-four patients underwent surgery for AA based on clinical as well as imaging findings, of whom 76 had appendicitis confirmed at histopathology. Three patients were misdiagnosed (3.6 %) on USG as appendicitis. Of 76 patients of appendicitis confirmed histopathologically, 63 (82.8 %) had features of appendicitis on USG and did not require any additional imaging modality. Of 121 patients, 12 (10 %) needed CT scan because of atypical features on USG. Of these 12 patients, seven had retrocecal appendicitis, and three high-up paracolic appendicitis. USG alone had sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of 81, 88, 92.6, 71.6, and 83 %, respectively. When combined with CT scan in select cases, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of combined USG + CT scan were 96 % (P = 0.0014), 89 %, 93 %, 93.5 % (P = 0.0001), and 93 % (P = 0.0484), respectively. Twenty-eight (23 %) patients were given alternative diagnosis on USG. Dedicated appendiceal USG should be used as a primary imaging modality in diagnosing or excluding AA. Appendiceal CT can serve as a problem-solving modality.
    Indian Journal of Surgery 01/2012; DOI:10.1007/s12262-012-0772-5 · 0.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of the present study was to correlate direct measurements of abdominal wall fat at the site of exam and appendiceal position with ultrasound (US) visualization of the appendix. The study took place at a large, urban pediatric teaching hospital. Demographic and imaging data of all patients who underwent both US and CT examinations within a 72-h period to evaluate for appendicitis were assessed. Two hundred eighteen patients met study criteria. Greater abdominal wall fat (p < 0.001) was observed in the subjects where the appendix was not visualized with ultrasound (17.04 mm, SD ± 13.52) than in subjects where the appendix was visualized with ultrasound (11.75 mm, SD ± 11.81) was significant. Using ROC curve analyses, there was no abdominal fat thickness cutoff threshold above which the appendix was significantly unlikely to be seen using US. Retrocecal location of the appendix was found to impair appendiceal visualization with US for both normal and inflamed appendices. Increased abdominal wall fat thickness was associated with decreased US appendiceal visualization rates, although there was no fat thickness value above which we could predict that the appendix would not be visualized with US. In patients with retrocecal appendices, the difference in visualization rates was significantly worse regardless of whether the appendix was normal or inflamed.
    Emergency Radiology 08/2011; 18(6):525-31. DOI:10.1007/s10140-011-0977-0
  • Source
    Journal of ultrasound in medicine: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 08/2012; 31(8):1153-7. · 1.53 Impact Factor