MRI for clinically suspected appendicitis during pregnancy.
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether MRI can be used to accurately diagnose or exclude appendicitis in pregnant patients with clinically suspected appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that MRI is helpful in the examination and diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients. MRI may therefore be a good alternative to CT in pregnant patients for whom sonographic findings are nondiagnostic.
- SourceAvailable from: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The presence of the appendix within a femoral hernia is rare. It was first described by the French surgeon Jacques Croissant de Garengeot in 1731. This phenomenon accounts for 0.8-1% of all femoral hernias. Acute appendicitis occurring within a femoral hernia is even rarer and is difficult to diagnose pre-operatively. This type of hernia is termed a de Garengeot hernia. The ultrasonographic and CT imaging features of de Garengeot hernias have been described previously. We report a case of a 57-year-old female who presented with a painful right-sided groin mass. She underwent MRI of the inguinal region, which successfully diagnosed this rare hernia pre-operatively. To our knowledge, this is the first description of a de Garengeot hernia diagnosed using MRI.The British journal of radiology 03/2012; 85(1011):e59-61. · 2.11 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study aims to retrospectively evaluate the right lower quadrant ultrasounds in women presenting during the second or third trimester of pregnancy for the frequency of appendix visualization and accuracy in diagnosing appendicitis. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study. We reviewed imaging records from 99 consecutive pregnant women from 2001 to 2011 who presented during the second (≥14 weeks gestation) or third trimester for right lower quadrant ultrasound to evaluate the appendix. Visualization of the appendix as well as the size and compressibility, if identified, were recorded. The medical records and labs related to the initial patient presentation, subsequent management, and follow-up were reviewed for surgical and clinical outcomes. Pathology records were reviewed to determine if appendicitis was present when appendectomy was performed. Patients who underwent appendectomy were considered to have appendicitis based on pathology results, and patients managed non-operatively with symptom improvement and those with a normal appendix at pathology were considered to not have appendicitis. During the study period, 99 women meeting inclusion criteria presented to our institution for right lower quadrant ultrasound to evaluate the appendix during the second or third trimester of pregnancy. The mean gestational age at presentation was 23 weeks (±7 weeks). The mean maternal age was 28 years (±6.6 years). The appendix was not visualized in 97% (96/99) of right lower quadrant ultrasound examinations. Of the three studies in which the appendix was visualized, two were considered positive for appendicitis and one was considered negative. Eight patients in this group ultimately underwent appendectomy, including the two patients with positive right lower quadrant ultrasounds, and appendicitis confirmed at pathology in seven of these cases (87.5%). Right lower quadrant ultrasound successfully demonstrated an abnormal appendix in 28.7% (two of seven) of surgically confirmed cases; however, this technique did not detect appendicitis in 71% (five of seven) of patients with surgically proven disease due to nonvisualization of the appendix. Retrospective review of right lower quadrant ultrasounds performed during the second and third trimester of pregnancy suggests that this modality has limited utility for diagnosing appendicitis due to infrequent visualization of the appendix.Emergency Radiology 02/2012; 19(4):293-9.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objectives of this study were to document the utilization of MRI compared with CT in pregnant patients presenting with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain at our institution and to compare the diagnostic performance of the two modalities. A retrospective review identified all pregnant patients at our institution who had MRI or CT exams of the abdomen and/or pelvis for acute nontraumatic abdominal pain over a 3-year period from January 2008 through December 2010. The imaging diagnoses were compared with pathologic data or operative findings as the primary reference standard or with clinical follow-up and laboratory data as the secondary reference standard. Patients without surgically proven diagnoses were followed clinically until delivery, when possible. Ninety-four pregnant patients were included in this study: 61 MRI exams were performed in 57 patients, 44 CT exams were performed in 43 patients (including six patients who had both), and 72 patients (77 %) had ultrasound prior to cross-sectional imaging, with the appendix specifically assessed in 25 patients but visualized in only two of them. Of 61 MRI exams, 24 were considered positive for imaging diagnoses, 33 were negative, and 4 were equivocal. Of 44 CT exams, 24 were positive and 20 were negative. The test characteristics for MRI and CT in the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain were as follows: sensitivity 91 and 88 %, specificity 85 and 90 %, positive predictive value 81 and 91 %, negative predictive value 94 and 8 5 %, and diagnostic accuracy 88 and 88 %, respectively. Differences were not statistically significant (p value = 1). The majority of MRIs (34/61 = 56 %) were read by emergency radiologists. MRI and CT performed equally well in the evaluation of acute nontraumatic abdominal pain during pregnancy. Given its lack of ionizing radiation, MRI may be preferable. Given that the majority of MRIs were read by radiologists specializing in emergency imaging, this is a technique that emergency radiologists should be comfortable interpreting.Emergency Radiology 08/2012;