The diagnostic value of the computed tomography scan and ultrasonography in acute appendicitis.

IF 2 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Mahshid Bahrami, Hannaneh Mirgaloyebayat, Zahra Mohajeri, Hossein Mohammadi, Samira Amin Afshari, Pooya Fazeli, Dorna Masaeli, Sayed Mohammad Amin Nourian
{"title":"The diagnostic value of the computed tomography scan and ultrasonography in acute appendicitis.","authors":"Mahshid Bahrami,&nbsp;Hannaneh Mirgaloyebayat,&nbsp;Zahra Mohajeri,&nbsp;Hossein Mohammadi,&nbsp;Samira Amin Afshari,&nbsp;Pooya Fazeli,&nbsp;Dorna Masaeli,&nbsp;Sayed Mohammad Amin Nourian","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The most prevalent cause of emergency abdominal surgery is acute appendicitis. Ultrasonography is safe and widely available, although it's operator-dependent and difficult for people with massive bodies. Computed tomography (CT) scans are more accurate than ultrasonography, with a 93 to 98% accuracy rate. The goal of this investigation is to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasonography and CT scanning for acute appendicitis. This is a cross-sectional study that was performed on 231 patients with suspected with acute appendicitis. The Alvarado score was initially used to diagnose acute appendicitis. A radiologist performed abdominal ultrasonography on all patients. If the results of the ultrasonography were negative or unclear, a CT scan was performed using oral contrast. Finally, all ultrasonography and CT scan data were reevaluated by an experienced radiologist and compared to the patient's final diagnosis in the case of surgery and pathology results. Comparisons between the two groups were performed. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of ultrasonography according to pathology results in patients with low clinical suspicion were 74.9%, 63.4%, 94.3%, and 67.6%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of CT scans based on pathology results were 87.9%, 81.8%, 94.7%, and 79.3%, respectively, in patients with low clinical suspicion. The CT scan results in female patients suspected of appendicitis were completely consistent with the pathology results. The CT scan demonstrated greater specificity and sensitivity in diagnosing acute appendicitis compared to abdominal ultrasonography.</p>","PeriodicalId":7572,"journal":{"name":"American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10009470/pdf/ajnmmi0013-0011.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The most prevalent cause of emergency abdominal surgery is acute appendicitis. Ultrasonography is safe and widely available, although it's operator-dependent and difficult for people with massive bodies. Computed tomography (CT) scans are more accurate than ultrasonography, with a 93 to 98% accuracy rate. The goal of this investigation is to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasonography and CT scanning for acute appendicitis. This is a cross-sectional study that was performed on 231 patients with suspected with acute appendicitis. The Alvarado score was initially used to diagnose acute appendicitis. A radiologist performed abdominal ultrasonography on all patients. If the results of the ultrasonography were negative or unclear, a CT scan was performed using oral contrast. Finally, all ultrasonography and CT scan data were reevaluated by an experienced radiologist and compared to the patient's final diagnosis in the case of surgery and pathology results. Comparisons between the two groups were performed. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of ultrasonography according to pathology results in patients with low clinical suspicion were 74.9%, 63.4%, 94.3%, and 67.6%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of CT scans based on pathology results were 87.9%, 81.8%, 94.7%, and 79.3%, respectively, in patients with low clinical suspicion. The CT scan results in female patients suspected of appendicitis were completely consistent with the pathology results. The CT scan demonstrated greater specificity and sensitivity in diagnosing acute appendicitis compared to abdominal ultrasonography.

计算机断层扫描和超声检查对急性阑尾炎的诊断价值。
急诊腹部手术最常见的原因是急性阑尾炎。超声检查是安全且广泛可用的,尽管它依赖于操作人员,并且对体重较大的人来说很困难。计算机断层扫描(CT)比超声扫描更准确,准确率为93%至98%。目的是探讨超声和CT扫描对急性阑尾炎的诊断价值。这是一项横断面研究,对231例疑似急性阑尾炎的患者进行了研究。Alvarado评分最初用于诊断急性阑尾炎。放射科医生对所有患者进行腹部超声检查。如果超声检查结果为阴性或不清楚,则使用口腔造影剂进行CT扫描。最后,由经验丰富的放射科医生重新评估所有超声和CT扫描数据,并将其与患者最终的手术诊断和病理结果进行比较。对两组进行比较。临床怀疑度低的患者根据病理结果进行超声检查的敏感性为74.9%,特异性为63.4%,阳性预测值为94.3%,阴性预测值为67.6%。在临床怀疑度低的患者中,CT扫描基于病理结果的敏感性为87.9%,特异性为81.8%,阳性预测值为94.7%,阴性预测值为79.3%。怀疑为阑尾炎的女性患者的CT扫描结果与病理结果完全一致。CT扫描在诊断急性阑尾炎方面比腹部超声检查具有更高的特异性和敏感性。
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
American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging
American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
4.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: The scope of AJNMMI encompasses all areas of molecular imaging, including but not limited to: positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), molecular magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, optical bioluminescence, optical fluorescence, targeted ultrasound, photoacoustic imaging, etc. AJNMMI welcomes original and review articles on both clinical investigation and preclinical research. Occasionally, special topic issues, short communications, editorials, and invited perspectives will also be published. Manuscripts, including figures and tables, must be original and not under consideration by another journal.
×
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