Predictive Value of Alvarado, Acute Inflammatory Response, Tzanakis and RIPASA Scores in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

S. Tahir, A. Nikolovski, Martina Ambardjieva, P. Markov, D. Mladenovik, G. Selim, B. Zafirova-Ivanovska, V. Janevski
{"title":"Predictive Value of Alvarado, Acute Inflammatory Response, Tzanakis and RIPASA Scores in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis","authors":"S. Tahir, A. Nikolovski, Martina Ambardjieva, P. Markov, D. Mladenovik, G. Selim, B. Zafirova-Ivanovska, V. Janevski","doi":"10.15388/lietchirur.2020.19.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA), as the most common cause of acute abdominal pain, has changed in the past decade by introducing scoring systems in addition to the use of clinical, laboratory parameters, and radiological examinations. This study aimed to assess the significance of the four scoring systems (Alvarado, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR), Raya Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and Tzanakis) in the prediction of delayed appendectomy. Materials and methods. The study included 100 respondents, who were diagnosed with AA in the period from January 2018 to February 2019 and were also operated on. In addition to the clinical, laboratory, and ultrasonographic examinations, four scoring systems (Alvarado, AIR, RIPASA, and Tzanakis) were used to diagnose AA. According to the obtained histopathological (HP) findings, the patients were divided into 3 groups: timely appendectomy, delayed appendectomy and unnecessary appendectomy. Using the sensitivity and specificity of all 4 scoring systems, ROC analysis was performed to predict delayed appendectomy. Results. In the study that included 100 patients (58% men, 42% women), after the appendectomy was performed, the resulting HP showed that 74% had a timely appendectomy, while 16% had delayed and 10% had an unnecessary appendectomy. For the prediction of delayed appendectomy, the area under the ROC curve showed a value of 0.577 for the Alvarado score, 0.504 for the AIR, 0.651 for the RIPASA, and 0.696 for the Tzanakis. Sensitivity and specificity for the Alvarado score was 54% and 62%, for RIPASA 62.5% and 63.5%, for Tzanakis 69% and 60.8%, respectively. Combining the three scoring systems (Alvarado, RIPASA, and Tzanakis), the surface area under the ROC curve was 0.762 (95% CI 0.521–0.783), with a sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 62%. Conclusion. In our study, the diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and Tzanakis showed better results than Alvarado, while AIR cannot be used to predict delayed appendectomy in our population. However, the simultaneous application of all three scoring systems, RIPASA, Tzanakis and Alvarado, has shown much better discriminatory ability, with higher sensitivity and specificity, as opposed to their use alone. Combining scoring systems should help in proper diagnosis to avoid negative appendectomy, but additional studies with a larger number of patients are needed to support these results.","PeriodicalId":52926,"journal":{"name":"Lietuvos Chirurgija","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lietuvos Chirurgija","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/lietchirur.2020.19.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA), as the most common cause of acute abdominal pain, has changed in the past decade by introducing scoring systems in addition to the use of clinical, laboratory parameters, and radiological examinations. This study aimed to assess the significance of the four scoring systems (Alvarado, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR), Raya Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and Tzanakis) in the prediction of delayed appendectomy. Materials and methods. The study included 100 respondents, who were diagnosed with AA in the period from January 2018 to February 2019 and were also operated on. In addition to the clinical, laboratory, and ultrasonographic examinations, four scoring systems (Alvarado, AIR, RIPASA, and Tzanakis) were used to diagnose AA. According to the obtained histopathological (HP) findings, the patients were divided into 3 groups: timely appendectomy, delayed appendectomy and unnecessary appendectomy. Using the sensitivity and specificity of all 4 scoring systems, ROC analysis was performed to predict delayed appendectomy. Results. In the study that included 100 patients (58% men, 42% women), after the appendectomy was performed, the resulting HP showed that 74% had a timely appendectomy, while 16% had delayed and 10% had an unnecessary appendectomy. For the prediction of delayed appendectomy, the area under the ROC curve showed a value of 0.577 for the Alvarado score, 0.504 for the AIR, 0.651 for the RIPASA, and 0.696 for the Tzanakis. Sensitivity and specificity for the Alvarado score was 54% and 62%, for RIPASA 62.5% and 63.5%, for Tzanakis 69% and 60.8%, respectively. Combining the three scoring systems (Alvarado, RIPASA, and Tzanakis), the surface area under the ROC curve was 0.762 (95% CI 0.521–0.783), with a sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 62%. Conclusion. In our study, the diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and Tzanakis showed better results than Alvarado, while AIR cannot be used to predict delayed appendectomy in our population. However, the simultaneous application of all three scoring systems, RIPASA, Tzanakis and Alvarado, has shown much better discriminatory ability, with higher sensitivity and specificity, as opposed to their use alone. Combining scoring systems should help in proper diagnosis to avoid negative appendectomy, but additional studies with a larger number of patients are needed to support these results.
Alvarado、急性炎症反应、Tzanakis和RIASA评分对急性阑尾炎诊断的预测价值
介绍作为急性腹痛最常见的原因,急性阑尾炎(AA)的诊断在过去十年中发生了变化,除了使用临床、实验室参数和放射学检查外,还引入了评分系统。本研究旨在评估四种评分系统(Alvarado、阑尾炎炎症反应(AIR)、Raya Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha阑尾炎(RIASA)和Tzanakis)在预测延迟性阑尾切除术中的意义。材料和方法。该研究包括100名受访者,他们在2018年1月至2019年2月期间被诊断为AA,并接受了手术。除了临床、实验室和超声检查外,还使用了四个评分系统(Alvarado、AIR、RIASA和Tzanakis)来诊断AA。根据获得的组织病理学(HP)结果,将患者分为3组:及时阑尾切除术、延迟阑尾切除术和非必要阑尾切除术。利用所有4个评分系统的敏感性和特异性,进行ROC分析以预测延迟阑尾切除术。结果。在这项包括100名患者(58%为男性,42%为女性)的研究中,在进行阑尾切除术后,HP显示74%的患者及时进行了阑尾切除术,16%的患者延迟进行,10%的患者进行了不必要的阑尾切除术。对于延迟阑尾切除术的预测,ROC曲线下的面积显示Alvarado评分为0.577,AIR评分为0.504,RIASA评分为0.651,Tzanakis评分为0.696。Alvarado评分的灵敏度和特异性分别为54%和62%,RIASA评分的灵敏度为62.5%和63.5%,Tzanakis评分的敏感性和特异性为69%和60.8%。结合三种评分系统(Alvarado、RIASA和Tzanakis),ROC曲线下的表面积为0.762(95%CI 0.521-0.783),敏感性为85%,特异性为62%。结论。在我们的研究中,RIASA和Tzanakis的诊断准确性显示出比Alvarado更好的结果,而AIR不能用于预测我们人群中延迟的阑尾切除术。然而,与单独使用相比,同时应用RIASA、Tzanakis和Alvarado这三种评分系统显示出更好的辨别能力,具有更高的敏感性和特异性。结合评分系统应有助于正确诊断,避免阑尾切除术阴性,但需要对更多患者进行额外的研究来支持这些结果。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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