The Roles of USG and NCCT in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Study in a Tertiary Care Center in North Eastern India.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Uddalok Das, Amarendra Nath Sarkar, Dilip Chandra Barman, Narayan Pandit
{"title":"The Roles of USG and NCCT in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Study in a Tertiary Care Center in North Eastern India.","authors":"Uddalok Das, Amarendra Nath Sarkar, Dilip Chandra Barman, Narayan Pandit","doi":"10.4314/ejhs.v33i4.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute appendicitis is a common cause of hospital admission and emergency laparotomy among children and young adults. Although the diagnosis is clinical, the use of radiological imaging has emerged over the past decades. Its principal use is as a problem-solving tool in equivocal cases. Owing to the increased use of imaging in the last few years, the negative appendicectomy rate has dropped significantly. In this prospective observational study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of Ultrasonography and Non-Contrast Computed Tomography.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One hundred and eighteen patients with clinically suspected appendicitis followed a designed protocol. Patients underwent appendicectomy after a first performed positive ultrasonography or after a positive Non-Contrast Computed Tomography when Ultrasonography was equivocal or nonspecific. When any other diagnosis was apparent in either imaging modality which could explain the symptomatology in the patient, they were considered negative for acute appendicitis and treated accordingly.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for Ultrasonography, Non-Contrast Computed Tomography, and the whole diagnostic pathway for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis were 70.73%,80.83%, and 78.54; 100%,100%,100%, and 83.6%; and 100%,83.33% and 94.92%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using Ultrasonography as the first-line diagnostic tool and Non-Contrast Computed Tomography as a complementary second-line diagnostic tool, appendicitis can be diagnosed with high accuracy and the negative laparotomy rate can be brought down significantly without any increase in the risk of complications. Computed Tomography is superior to Ultrasonography for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":12003,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","volume":"33 4","pages":"681-688"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11111192/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v33i4.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute appendicitis is a common cause of hospital admission and emergency laparotomy among children and young adults. Although the diagnosis is clinical, the use of radiological imaging has emerged over the past decades. Its principal use is as a problem-solving tool in equivocal cases. Owing to the increased use of imaging in the last few years, the negative appendicectomy rate has dropped significantly. In this prospective observational study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of Ultrasonography and Non-Contrast Computed Tomography.

Method: One hundred and eighteen patients with clinically suspected appendicitis followed a designed protocol. Patients underwent appendicectomy after a first performed positive ultrasonography or after a positive Non-Contrast Computed Tomography when Ultrasonography was equivocal or nonspecific. When any other diagnosis was apparent in either imaging modality which could explain the symptomatology in the patient, they were considered negative for acute appendicitis and treated accordingly.

Results: The respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for Ultrasonography, Non-Contrast Computed Tomography, and the whole diagnostic pathway for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis were 70.73%,80.83%, and 78.54; 100%,100%,100%, and 83.6%; and 100%,83.33% and 94.92%.

Conclusion: Using Ultrasonography as the first-line diagnostic tool and Non-Contrast Computed Tomography as a complementary second-line diagnostic tool, appendicitis can be diagnosed with high accuracy and the negative laparotomy rate can be brought down significantly without any increase in the risk of complications. Computed Tomography is superior to Ultrasonography for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

USG 和 NCCT 在诊断急性阑尾炎中的作用:印度东北部一家三级医疗中心的研究。
背景:急性阑尾炎是儿童和青少年入院和急诊开腹手术的常见原因。虽然诊断是临床的,但在过去的几十年中,放射成像技术的应用也逐渐兴起。其主要用途是在诊断不明确的病例中作为解决问题的工具。由于近几年影像学应用的增加,阑尾切除术的阴性率明显下降。在这项前瞻性观察研究中,我们比较了超声波和非对比计算机断层扫描的诊断准确性:方法:118 名临床疑似阑尾炎患者按照设计方案进行检查。患者在首次超声波检查呈阳性后,或在超声波检查呈阳性的非对比计算机断层扫描呈等效或非特异性后,接受阑尾切除术。如果任何一种影像学诊断方法都能解释患者的症状,则将其视为急性阑尾炎阴性,并进行相应治疗:结果:超声波检查、非对比计算机断层扫描和整个诊断路径对急性阑尾炎诊断的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为 70.73%、80.83% 和 78.54;100%、100%、100% 和 83.6%;100%、83.33% 和 94.92%:以超声波为一线诊断工具,以非对比计算机断层扫描为辅助二线诊断工具,阑尾炎的诊断准确率较高,开腹手术的阴性率可显著降低,且不会增加并发症的风险。在诊断急性阑尾炎方面,计算机断层扫描优于超声波检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
137
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences is a general health science journal addressing clinical medicine, public health and biomedical sciences. Rarely, it covers veterinary medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信